2025 (3) TMI 358 - HC - Income Tax

Legal Representatives Must Be Notified Before Tax Proceedings Against Deceased, Notices Quashed for Procedural Irregularity

Amjad Ahmed Shaikh (Legal heir of late Ahmed Gulamnabi Shaikh) Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward 22 (1) (1), Mumbai and Ors.

HC Bombay allowed a writ petition challenging tax notices issued to a deceased individual. The court found the notices invalid as they were addressed to ... Validity of notice and finally the orders issued in the name of deceased assessee - HELD THAT:- The explanation that the department was corresponding with the chartered accountant is not quite relevant or convincing. Once it is established that Ahmed Gulamnabi Shaikh had expired by the time the notices were issued and the department had knowledge of demise, there was no justification for issuing the notices and, finally, the impugned orders in the name of the dead person. The argument based on Section 159 of the Act also does not appeal to us in the facts of the present case. Admittedly, no notices were issued to the legal representatives. The notices were issued to the dead person, and consequently, the legal representatives cannot be said to know about such notices. In such circumstances, the impugned notices or the impugned order made based thereon and same binds the legal representatives. In Devendra [2023 (7) TMI 694 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], Gourang Anil Wakade [2024 (12) TMI 778 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], and Sumit Balkrishna Gupta [2019 (2) TMI 1209 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] the Coordinate Benches of this Court have consistently held that notices to a dead person or orders against a dead person are null and void. Following the reasoning in these decisions, the rule will have to be made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) of this petition. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned notices and the impugned orders. The High Court of Bombay issued a judgment in a case where the petitioner sought various substantive reliefs through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner requested the court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Mandamus, and Prohibition to quash, cancel, and set aside the impugned notices and orders issued under the Income-tax Act against a deceased individual, Late Ahmed Gulamnabi Shaikh. The petitioner argued that despite informing the Income-tax Officer about Shaikh's demise, the notices and orders were still issued in his name. The respondent, representing the revenue, contended that since the notices were addressed to the chartered accountant and no intimation was received about the death, proceedings could continue against the legal representatives under Section 159 of the Income-tax Act.The court considered the submissions of both parties and analyzed the facts and legal precedents related to the issuance of notices and orders against deceased individuals. The court noted that the department had knowledge of Shaikh's demise by May 2018, as evidenced by the communication from Shaikh's son and the death certificate provided. Despite this knowledge, the impugned notices and orders were issued in Shaikh's name, which the court found unjustified.The court rejected the respondent's argument based on Section 159 of the Income-tax Act, stating that since no notices were issued to the legal representatives and the notices were addressed to the deceased person, the legal representatives could not be bound by them. Citing previous decisions, the court held that notices and orders against a deceased person are null and void. Therefore, the court granted the relief sought by the petitioner and quashed the impugned notices and orders.In its final determination, the court made the rule absolute in terms of the relief requested in prayer clause (a) of the petition, without imposing any costs. The court clarified that its judgment did not prevent the respondents from proceeding against the legal representatives in accordance with the law. Additionally, the court kept other contentions raised in the petition open for future consideration, as the judgment was based solely on the grounds that the impugned notices and orders were issued against a deceased individual.