Assessment Order cannot Target Sole Legal Heir of Deceased Assessee Alone: Delhi HC sets aside Rs. 10 Crores Demand [Read Order]
![Assessment Order cannot Target Sole Legal Heir of Deceased Assessee Alone: Delhi HC sets aside Rs. 10 Crores Demand [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Assessment-Order-cannot-Target-Sole-Legal-Heir-of-Deceased-Assessee-Alone-Delhi-HC-TAXSCAN.jpg "Assessment Order cannot Target Sole Legal Heir of Deceased Assessee Alone: Delhi HC sets aside Rs. 10 Crores Demand [Read Order]")
In a recent judgment the Delhi High Court observed that an assessment order cannot target sole legal heir of deceased assessee, thereby setting aside a demand of Rupees 10 crores. The writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2017-2018. The petitioner seeks to assail notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Besides this, challenge is also laid to the assessment order....
In a recent judgment the Delhi High Court observed that an assessment order cannot target sole legal heir of deceased assessee, thereby setting aside a demand of Rupees 10 crores.
The writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2017-2018. The petitioner seeks to assail notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Besides this, challenge is also laid to the assessment order. It is not in dispute that the impugned notice is addressed to one, Kuldip Kohli.
M Sufian Siddiqui, counsel for the petitioners, argued that the revenue was aware of the fact that Kuldeep Kohli had expired. In this context, the counsel drew the attention to the assessment order concerning AY 2017-18 in respect of Shine Marbles, which, we are told, was the proprietorship concern of the deceased/assessee i.e., Kuldip Kohli.
The respondent/revenue were aware of the factum of death of Mr Kuldip Kohli, and that the proceeding had been attended by petitioner no.1, i.e., Darpan Kohli. It appears that since this fact came to the knowledge of the respondent/revenue, the impugned assessment order, although addressed to the deceased/assessee, adverts to the one of the legal heirs, i.e., Darpan Kohli/petitioner no.1. The deceased/assessee had more than one legal heir, which includes other petitioners also.
A Division Bench comprising of Justices Rajiv Shakhdher and Girish Kathpalia observed that “Given this position, Mr Sunil Agarwal cannot but accept that the assessment order could not have been directed only against Darpan Kohli i.e., petitioner no.1. Therefore, according to us, the best way to forward would be to set-aside the assessment order. It is directed accordingly. The AO will issue notice to the petitioners, and grant them opportunity to present their defence qua the merits of the case.”
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
