2025 (9) TMI 1841

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned order dated 31st August 2024 passed under Section 148A(d); and the notice dated 31st August 2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "IT Act"). The assessment year in question is A.Y. 2018-19. The short point on which the said notices as well as the impugned order have been challenged is that they have been issued in the name of a dead person. 3. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid notices, as well as the impugned order, have been issued/passed in the name of Jatin Bhagwandas Shah, who was the husband of the Petitioner. He expired on 23rd February 2019. In fact, the intimation of this death was informed to the Income Tax Department vide Petitioner's letter dated 1st April 2019. Taking into consideratio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he name of deceased assesee therein are concerned. It is not seriously disputed by the Revenue before us that a reopening notice issued in the name of a deceased person is null and void. This in view of the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Vikram Singh v. Union of India [2018] 401 ITR 302 rendered on 22.1.2018, a decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Rajender Kumar Sehgal v. ITO [2019] 101 taxmann.com 233/260 Taxmann 412 rendered on 19.11.2018 and the decision of Madras High Court in the case of Alamelu Veerappan v. ITO [2018] 95 taxmann.com 155/257 Taxman 72. These Courts had occasion to consider an identical issue of notice of reopening in the name of the deceased assessee and after considering the same, came to the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....It is made clear that this order will not prohibit the Revenue from issuing a fresh notice for reassessment, if requirement of Sections 147/148 of the Act are satisfied, including the limitation period therein." 6. This decision, thereafter, has also been followed by another Division Bench of this Court in the case of Devendra Vs. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income-tax [2023] 153 taxmann.com 520 (Bombay). 7. In light of the aforesaid decisions, we are clearly of the view that the impugned notices as well as the impugned order are not valid and cannot be allowed to stand. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus:- "(a) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a ....