TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 1131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing an order u/s 263 of the Act in the case of deceased person without issuing any notice u/s 263 to the legal heir of the deceased. 2. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing the order in the case of deceased person without giving any opportunity of being heard to the legal heir of the deceased. 3. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing an order u/s 263 of the Act ignoring the specific provision of section 159 of the Act which prohibit any action u/s 263 in the case of a deceased. 4. The Ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in passing an order u/s 263 of the Act wholly on assumptions a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e department was not intimated about the death of the assessee and the legal heirs failed to take any steps to cancel the PAN registration in the name of the assessee and, therefore, no fault could be found with the department. 28. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Alamelu Veerappan vs. Income Tax Officer, Non-corporate Ward-2(2), Chennai, wherein the Madras High Court held as under : "14. The issue, which falls for consideration, is as to whether the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act issued in the name of the dead person - the said Mr.S.Veerappan is enforceable in law and the subsidiary issue being as to whether the petitioner, being the wife of the sai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he period of limitation, as it has been issued after 31.3.2017. If we approach the problem sans complicated facts, a notice issued beyond the period of limitation i.e. 31.3.2017 is a nullity, unenforceable in law and without jurisdiction. Thus, merely because the Department was not intimated about the death of the assessee, that cannot, by itself, extend the period of limitation prescribed under the Statute. Nothing has been placed before this Court by the Revenue to show that there is a statutory obligation on the part of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee to immediately intimate the death of the assessee or take steps to cancel the PAN registration. 18. In such circumstances, the question would be as to whether Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. 2) For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or re-computation under section 147) of the income of the deceased and for the purpose of levying any sum in the hands of the legal representative in accordance with the provisions of subsection (1),- (a) any proceeding taken against the deceased before his death shall be deemed to have been taken against the legal representative and may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased; (b) any proceeding which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived, may be taken against....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion on the part of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee to immediately intimate the death of the assessee or take steps to cancel the PAN registration." 33. The judgment in Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (supra) offers no assistance to the respondents. In Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Maruti Suzuki India Limited (supra) the Supreme Court was dealing with Section 170 of the Act, 1961 (succession to business otherwise than on death) wherein notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, 1961 was issued to non-existing company. In that case, Department by very nature of transaction was aware about the amalgamation. However, the said judgment nowhere states that there is an obligation upon the....