In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court directed the tax authorities to reconsider an order issued in the name of a deceased individual despite a condonation of delay application submitted by the legal heir for filing a late income tax return.
The petitioner, Sampath Kumar Srikala is the mother and legal representative of the late Bharath who was involved in the housing and construction business and passed away in a road accident on 20.10.2019. Bharath did not file an income tax return for the assessment year (AY) 2020-2021 due to his demise.
The petitioner sought to act as Bharath’s legal heir and applied for approval on the tax filing portal which remained pending. On 02.12.2021, the petitioner filed an application under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act requesting condonation of delay in filing the return of income for AY 2020-2021 due to genuine hardship.
Effortless Faceless Appeals – File with GPT Precision – Click here to Register
Despite this application, the Income Tax Department issued a notice dated 30.03.2024 under Section 148A(b) alleging that income chargeable to tax for AY 2020-2021 had escaped assessment.
The petitioner challenged the notices and order by filing two writ petitions. one to quash the notice and impugned order under Sections 148A(d) and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and another to seek a directive for the disposal of her condonation delay application.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that assessments or reassessments cannot legally proceed against a deceased individual making the notice and order invalid. The petitioner’s counsel also pointed out that the petitioner’s delay-condonation application was not considered and that she had authorization from the deceased’s wife to act on her behalf.
Effortless Faceless Appeals – File with GPT Precision – Click here to Register
Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that conducting assessments against a deceased person was not valid. The court observed that the petitioner’s delay condonation application had not been addressed violating procedural fairness and natural justice.
The court quashed the notice and impugned order dated 30.03.2024 and directed the respondents to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s application within four weeks after giving her a personal hearing. The writ petitions were disposed of with no costs.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
