2025 (5) TMI 562 - HC - GST

Tax Proceedings Against Deceased Taxpayer Invalidated: Legal Representatives Must Receive Proper Notice and Opportunity to Respond

The SC examined the validity of tax proceedings against a deceased GST taxpayer. The Court ruled that show cause notices and tax determinations cannot be ... Issuance of SCN in the name of deceased - recovery can be made from the legal representatives even after the determination has been made after the death of the proprietor of the firm or not - HELD THAT:- A perusal of Section 93 would reveal that the same only deals with the liability to pay tax, interest or penalty in a case where the business is continued after the death, by the legal representative or where the business is discontinued, however, the provision does not deal with the fact as to whether the determination at all can take place against a deceased person and the said provision cannot and does not authorise the determination to be made against a dead person and recovery thereof from the legal representative. Once the provision deals with the liability of a legal representative on account of death of the proprietor of the firm, it is sine qua non that the legal representative is issued a show cause notice and after seeking response from the legal representative, the determination should take place. Conclusion - The determination made in the present case wherein the show cause notice was issued and the determination was made against the dead person without issuing notice to the legal representative, cannot be sustained. Petition allowed. 1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe core legal questions considered by the Court are:- Whether a show cause notice and subsequent determination of tax liability under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the Act) can be issued and made against a deceased person.- Whether the provisions of Section 93 of the Act authorize the issuance of such proceedings against the legal representatives only, and the procedural requirements to be followed in such cases.- Whether the impugned order raising demand against the deceased proprietor without issuing notice to the legal representative is valid and sustainable.2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSISIssue 1: Validity of Issuing Show Cause Notice and Determination Against a Deceased PersonRelevant legal framework and precedents: Section 73(9) of the Act empowers the tax authorities to issue show cause notices and pass orders for recovery of tax dues. Section 93 of the Act provides special provisions regarding the liability to pay tax, interest, or penalty in cases where the liable person dies. It states that if the business is continued by the legal representative, such representative is liable, or if discontinued, the legal representative is liable to pay from the estate.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court observed that Section 93 does not explicitly authorize the issuance of a show cause notice or determination against a deceased person. Instead, it contemplates liability to be enforced against the legal representative or the estate of the deceased. The Court emphasized that the provision does not sanction proceedings in the name of the deceased but rather provides for recovery from the legal representatives following due procedure.Key evidence and findings: The undisputed facts revealed that the show cause notice dated 08.05.2024 and subsequent reminder were issued in the name of the deceased proprietor, after his death on 01.05.2021, and after cancellation of the GST registration effective 01.04.2021. The petitioner, being the legal representative, did not receive any notice or opportunity to respond.Application of law to facts: Since the show cause notice and determination were made against the deceased without involving the legal representative, the Court found the proceedings to be void ab initio. The procedural requirement to issue notice to the legal representative before determination was not complied with.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondents relied on Section 93 to justify recovery from legal representatives even after death. The Court acknowledged this but clarified that Section 93 does not empower issuance of show cause notices or determination against the deceased person directly, but only against the legal representatives.Conclusions: The Court concluded that proceedings initiated and determination made against the deceased person without issuing notice to the legal representative are invalid and unsustainable.Issue 2: Liability of Legal Representatives under Section 93 of the GST ActRelevant legal framework and precedents: Section 93(1)(a) and (b) of the Act deal with liability of legal representatives where the business is continued or discontinued after the death of the proprietor. The legal representative is liable to pay tax, interest, or penalty due from the deceased, either from the estate or as continuing the business.Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Court interpreted Section 93 as a provision that contemplates liability of legal representatives but conditions the enforcement of such liability on proper procedural steps, including issuing notice and providing opportunity to respond.Key evidence and findings: The petitioner, as the legal representative, was not issued any show cause notice or opportunity to respond before the demand was raised. The GST registration of the firm was cancelled after the proprietor's death, indicating discontinuation of business.Application of law to facts: The Court held that since the business was discontinued and the legal representative was not served notice, the recovery proceedings against the deceased without involving the legal representative violated the mandate of Section 93.Treatment of competing arguments: The respondents argued that recovery can be made from legal representatives even after the death of the proprietor. The Court agreed but emphasized that such recovery must be preceded by due process directed at the legal representatives, not the deceased.Conclusions: The Court concluded that liability under Section 93 can only be enforced against legal representatives after due notice and opportunity, and not by issuing proceedings against the deceased.3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSThe Court held:'The provision [Section 93] does not authorise the determination to be made against a dead person and recovery thereof from the legal representative.''Once the provision deals with the liability of a legal representative on account of death of the proprietor of the firm, it is sine qua non that the legal representative is issued a show cause notice and after seeking response from the legal representative, the determination should take place.''The determination made in the present case wherein the show cause notice was issued and the determination was made against the dead person without issuing notice to the legal representative, cannot be sustained.'The core principles established are:- Proceedings for recovery of tax dues under the GST Act cannot be initiated or determined against a deceased person.- Section 93 of the GST Act contemplates liability of legal representatives but requires that they be issued proper notice and given opportunity to respond before determination and recovery.- Cancellation of GST registration upon death of the proprietor and discontinuation of business necessitates that recovery proceedings be directed against the legal representatives or estate, not the deceased.Final determinations:- The impugned order dated 31.07.2024 raising demand against the deceased person without notice to the legal representative is quashed and set aside.- The respondents are free to initiate proceedings in accordance with law, ensuring compliance with procedural requirements under Section 93.