Sumit Balkrishna Gupta. v. ACIT (2020) 268 Taxman 42 (Bom) (HC)

S. 143(3) : Assessment–Notice–Dead person-Order is non est in law – Notice was quashed. [S.143(2), 292B, Art.226]

The assessee was the son and the legal heir of deceased who died on 9-6-2014. For the relevant assessment year, the assessee being the legal heir of the deceased filed a return of income declaring certain taxable income.

The assessee also uploaded a request to be registered as the legal heir of deceased. The request of the assessee was accepted by the respondent-revenue. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued in the name of the deceased.

The assessee by his letter called upon the AO to withdraw the impugned notice issued under S.  143(3) as it had been issued in the name of the dead person.  The AO rejected the assessee’s objection to the impugned notice having been issued in the name of the dead person on the ground that the nature of the defect viz. issue of notice in case of wrong person stood cured by S.  292B and that the legal heir of the deceased was not registered with the database of the Department, thus, no fault in having issued the notice in the name of the deceased. On Writ the Court held that a notice issued under S. 143(2) which gives jurisdiction to complete the assessment having been issued in the name of the dead person is non est in law and it is not saved by section 292B. The issue of a notice under section 143(2) of the Act so as to take up the assessment for scrutiny is not a procedural but a substantive provision. Therefore, where a notice is issued in the name of a wrong person, there would be no issuing of notice as required under the Act. In such cases, as in the case of section 148 of the Act, the issuing of a notice in the name of the wrong person is not a procedural and / or clerical error. Therefore, being a substantive defect, the notice cannot be saved by section 292B of the  Act. Accordingly the notice is quashed. (WP. No. 3583 of 2018 dt 15 -02 208  (AY. 2016 -17)