TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 390
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny counter affidavit and he further submits that the writ petition be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. 3. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage. 4. The case of the writ petitioner is that there happened to be a firm by the name of P.B. Sethi Plastics, which was registered under U.P. GSTIN No.09ACEPS78501ZB. The proprietor of the firm was Buldeo Raj Sethi. However, he expired on 21.07.2020. According to the writ petitioner, who happens to be the legal heir, who has preferred the present writ petitioner through an authorized representative Sri Sunil Kumar, a show cause notice was issued to the sole proprietorship firm on 21.09.2023 and thereafter on 20.12.2023, a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecided on 02.04.2025, wherein the provisions of Section 93 of the Act was considered. Further submission is that since Buldeo Raj Sethi, the sole proprietor of the firm in question had expired on 21.07.2020 and the GST registration was cancelled and business was transferred on 31.07.2020 vide application filed with ARN AA091020029190X dated 06.10.2020, then it was humanly not possible for the writ petitioner being the legal heir to have any knowledge about the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act conducted against the deceased in that regard. Thus, the appellate authority in rejecting the appeal preferred by the writ petitioner against the order passed under Section 73 of the Act on delay had committed patent error of law, particularly w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted against the sole proprietorship firm, whose sole proprietor was the deceased Buldeo Raj Sethi, while issuing the show cause notice dated 21.09.2023 and the order under Section 73 of the Act came to be passed by the original authority on 20.12.2023. The appeal came to be filed questioning the order passed under Section 73 of the Act dated 20.12.2023 before the appellate authority, which came to be rejected on 26.06.2025 by the appellate authority. 10. A bare look of the memo of appeal which is Annexure-5 at page 50 of the paper-book, relevant extract at page-52, would go to show that the legal heir who had preferred the appeal had taken a ground that for the very first time, the order dated 20.12.2023, came into the knowledge of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions regarding liability to pay tax, interest or penalty in certain cases: (1) Save as otherwise provided in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (31 of 2016), where a person, liable to pay tax, interest or penalty under this Act, dies, then - (a) if a business carried on by the person is continued after his death by his legal representative or any other person, such legal representative or other person, shall be liable to pay tax, interest or penalty due from such person under this Act; and (b) if the business carried on by the person is discontinued, whether before or after his death, his legal representative shall be liable to pay, out of the estate of the deceased, to the extent to which the estate is c....