TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Legal Heirs Can Be Pursued for Tax Proceedings When Business Continues After Dealer's Death Under CGST/SGST Act</h1> <h3>BENOY ABRAHAM Versus STATE TAX OFFICER, NEDUMANGADU</h3> SC quashed Ext.P3 order issued against a deceased dealer under CGST/SGST Act. Court held that proceedings cannot be initiated directly against a deceased ... Challenge to order passed against a deceased person - Section 93 of the CGST/SGST Act - HELD THAT:- Since Ext.P3 seems to be issued against a deceased person, the said order is a nullity. It may be true that the provisions of Section 93 of the CGST/SGST Acts permit the continuance of proceedings against the legal heirs of a deceased person, in a case where the business has been discontinued. However, the said provision does not authorize the continuance and culmination of proceedings against a deceased person. Therefore, Ext.P3 order is a nullity as rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. This writ petition is allowed and Ext.P3 is quashed. The respondent is permitted to continue with the proceedings against the legal heirs of late Santhamma T. Issues:1. Validity of Ext.P3 order passed against a deceased person.2. Interpretation of Section 93 of the CGST/SGST Act regarding proceedings against legal heirs of a deceased dealer.3. Authority of legal heirs to represent other legal heirs in ongoing proceedings.Analysis:1. The petitioner, a legal heir of a deceased registered dealer under the CGST/SGST Act, challenged the validity of Ext.P3 order issued post the dealer's demise. The petitioner argued that the order against a deceased person is a nullity. The court agreed, stating that while Section 93 allows proceedings against legal heirs if the business is continued/discontinued, it does not authorize actions against a deceased person. Consequently, Ext.P3 was deemed null and quashed.2. The Government Pleader contended that under Section 93, liabilities against a deceased dealer can be pursued against legal heirs if the business is discontinued. However, the court clarified that this provision does not permit proceedings against the deceased person directly. The court directed the respondent to proceed against the legal heirs, including the petitioner who holds Power of Attorney for others, ensuring proper notices are issued to all legal heirs for completion of proceedings.3. The petitioner, being one of the legal heirs and holding Power of Attorney for others, sought to represent all legal heirs in ongoing proceedings. The court acknowledged the petitioner's authority to act on behalf of other legal heirs mentioned in the Legal Heirship Certificate. It directed the respondent to issue notices to the petitioner for further proceedings, considering such notice as proper notification to all legal heirs. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to file supplementary replies/objections to any notices issued by the respondent.In conclusion, the court allowed the writ petition, quashed Ext.P3, and directed the respondent to continue proceedings against the legal heirs. The petitioner, as a legal heir and Power of Attorney holder for others, was instructed to appear for further proceedings within a specified timeline. The judgment emphasized the distinction between pursuing actions against a deceased person and legal heirs under the CGST/SGST Act, ensuring due process and representation for all concerned parties.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
