2022 (3) TMI 766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to "the Act") for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. The short question involved in this particular case is this as to whether the notice for re-opening of Assessment Year under Section 148 of the Act issued in the name of deceased person the valid or not. 3. We have heard the respective parties and also perused the relevant materials available on record. 4. The brief facts leading to the case is this that the applicant before us namely Japan N. Shah is the legal heir of the assessee Jayantilal Kalidas Shah left for his heavenly on 20.06.2011. The copy of the death certificate is on record before us. A notice under Section 148 for re-opening of assessment was issued in the name ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee to the department and, thus, he supports the order passed by the authorities below. 7. It is a settled position of law neither re-opening notice can be issued in the name of the deceased person nor the same can be continued against the deceased. The Ld. A.R. further relied upon the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench on the identical facts in the matter of Shri Rajesh G. Shah vs. ITO in ITA No. 2232/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2007-08 and the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Savita Kapila vs. ACIT, reported in (2020) 118 taxmann.com 46 (Delhi). While dealing with the issue the Coordinate Bench has been placed to observe as follows: "6. Admittedly after the demise of the assessee on 05.01.2011 the no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t in the case of Urmilaben Anirudhsinhji Jadeja vs. ITO, reported in 420 ITR 226 (Gujarat), PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., reported in (2019) 416 ITR 613 (SC) and Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel vs. ITO, reported in (2019) 413 ITR 276 (Gujarat). The ratio laid down in the order passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Alamela Veerappan vs. ITO, reported in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 155/257 Taxman 72 (Mad.) has also been considered by us where the ratio as above has been laid down." 8. Further that we find that the factum of death of the assessee on 20.06.2011 was already in the knowledge of the Ld. AO which is evident from Page 4 Paragraph 6.1 of the AO. Under these circumstances is the revenue who is to take proper step wh....