ESTATE OF THE LATE NAGARATHNA RAJAPPA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP/4441/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the estate of the late Nagarathna Rajappa, represented by her husband Sri. L.C. Nagaraja, challenging several orders related to income tax assessments for the year 2012-13. The original assessee, L.C. Nagaraja, had filed returns and subsequent appeals which were still pending at the time of his death. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal posthumously, leading to the current writ petition. The petitioner argued that the orders against a deceased person are void ab initio and should be set aside. The court agreed, noting the procedural error in dismissing an appeal against a deceased individual and remitted the case for a fresh assessment considering all relevant years.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 672751 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: M DILIP
• Assessee Lawyers: M V SESHACHALA
• Keywords: Assessment Year 2012-13; Legal representative; Nullity; Void ab initio; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1057453442(1); ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1060104148(1); ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058347556(1); ITNS-65

Judgement Text

" - 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 4441 OF 2024 (T-IT) BETWEEN: ESTATE OF THE LATE NAGARATHNA RAJAPPA REP. BY HER HUSBAND SRI. L.C. NAGARAJA S/O LATE LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT JANAMUKHI, NO.211, PARAMANA EXTENSION, NEAR SYNDICATE BANK, NELAMANGALA – 562 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.V. SESHACHALA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. NAGHARISH G S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(2(4), BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. 3. TAX RECOVERY OFFICER-1 BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 095. Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 5. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) ROOM NO. 245-A, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M. DILIP.,ADVOCATE) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARETICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE PROCEEDING DATED 27/10/2023 BEARING NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1057453442(1) ANNEXURE-H AND PROCEEDING DATED 25.01.2024 BEARING NO. ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1060104148(1) ANNEXURE-H1 BOTH PASSED BY THIRD RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND (b) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2023 PASSED BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT BEARING NO. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058347556(1) ANNEXURE-G AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 26.03.2015 BEARING NO.ITNS-65, ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 & ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “ a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the proceedings dated: 27.10.2023 bearing No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/1057453442(1) Annexure-H & proceeding dated: 25.01.2024 bearing No. ITBA/COM/F/17/2023-24/106010414/(1) Annexure-H1 both passed by third respondent for Assessment year 2012-13. b) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated: 30.11.2023 passed by fifth respondent bearing No. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058347556(1) Annexure-G and the assessment order dated: 26.03.2015 bearing No. ITNS-65, Annexure-A passed by first respondent for Assessment Year 2012-13. c) Issue such other writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the present case. “ 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents – revenue and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that one L.C.Naragaj, husband of the petitioner was the original assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2012-13, pursuant to which, the assessment order dated 26.03.2015 was passed by the 1st respondent – Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the same, the aforesaid assessee filed an appeal before the appellate authority, during the pendency of which, he filed an amendment application on 13.01.2020 raising additional grounds and bringing to the notice of the appellate authority the subsequent events corresponding to previous and subsequent assessment years i.e., - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 2008-09 to 2011-12 and 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 had been passed in favour of the assessee, pursuant to the orders of remand passed by the appellate authority. Before the appeal and application for additional grounds were taken up for consideration, the original assessee expired and thereafter. the appellate authority proceeded to pass the impugned order by dismissing the appeal as against the dead person. 3.1 It is contended that the impugned order passed against the dead assessee is a nullity, non-est and void ab initio in the eye of law and the same deserves to be set aside. It is also submitted that the appellate authority would necessarily have to reconsider the claim of the petitioner, who is a heir and legal representative of the original assessee, bearing in mind the orders passed by the Assessing Officer in the previous and subsequent years and in accordance with law by setting aside the impugned order of the appellate authority. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents – revenue submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 5. As rightly contended by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, it is an undisputed fact that the original assessee expired on 02.12.2021 during the pendency of the appeal filed by him, in which, an amendment application filed for additional grounds by bringing to the notice of the appellate authority, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer in respect of the previous assessment years and subsequent assessment years was pending consideration. Under these circumstances, in the light of the undisputed fact that the impugned order passed at Annexure-G dated 30.11.2023 was against a dead person being a nullity, non- est and void ab initio, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the appellate authority and remit the matter back to the 5th respondent – appellate authority for reconsideration afresh bearing in mind after considering the application for additional grounds bearing in mind the assessment orders passed in the previous and subsequent years by the Assessing Officer. 6. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:6793 WP No. 4441 of 2024 (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-G dated 30.11.2023 passed by the 5th respondent is hereby set aside. (iii) Consequently, the impugned proceedings at Annexure-H and Annexure-H1 dated 27.10.2023 and 25.01.2024 respectively both passed by the 3rd respondent is hereby set aside. (iv) The matter is remitted back to the 5th respondent – appellate authority for reconsideration afresh bearing in mind the amendment application dated 13.01.2020 filed by the original assessee raising additional grounds and the orders passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 and 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 in accordance with law. (v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings, documents etc., which shall be considered by the appellate authority in accordance with law. SD/- JUDGE Srl. "