Proceedings against a deceased sole proprietor require notice to the legal representative before continuation of tax action.

An order-in-original passed against a deceased sole proprietor was treated as legally vulnerable and was quashed. The HC held that proceedings against a proprietary concern could not continue against a dead proprietor without first taking steps against the legal representative, at least by issuing notice if the department intended to proceed further. The Court did not decide the disputed question of whether death had been specifically intimated, but noted that an earlier order in similar proceedings had already stayed further action after the same objection was raised. The respondents were left free to pursue their claims in accordance with law against the petitioner's estate or legal representative.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order-in-original made against a deceased sole proprietor was liable to be quashed, and whether the department could proceed without first taking steps against the legal representative.

Analysis: The sole proprietor had died prior to the impugned order. The Court treated the order as vulnerable because it had been made against a dead person. It declined to examine the disputed question of specific intimation of death, but noted that an earlier order in similar proceedings had already stayed further action after the same objection was raised. The Court also held that, in the case of a proprietary concern, the department could not proceed against the dead proprietor without at least issuing notice to the legal representative if it intended to continue the proceedings.

Conclusion: The order-in-original dated 23 January 2026 was quashed and set aside. The respondents were left at liberty to take steps in accordance with law to pursue their claims against the petitioner.

---