Shri Vikram Singh Puar Son & LR of Late Tukoji Roa Puar, Dewas V. THE Pr. CIT-1, Bhopal

ITA 407/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2298 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B G JOSHI
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 143(3); 263; 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.407/IND/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 VIKRAM SINH PUAR SON AND LR OR LATE TOKOJI RAO PUAR, ANAND BHAWAN PLACE, DEWAS (MP) / VS. PR. CIT - 1 AYAKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL ( APPELLANT ) ( REVENUE ) P.A. NO. AGDPP8186B APPELLANT BY SHRI B. G . JOSHI , ADV. REVENUE BY SHRI RAJIV JAIN, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 01.03.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.03.2018 / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), BHOPAL, ( IN SHORT PR. CIT), DATED 18.03.2016 PERTAINING TO THE A.Y. 2011 -12. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : VIKRAM SINGH PUAR 2 1. THE LD. PR. CIT, BHOPAL ERRED IN PASSING THE OR DER U/S 263 OF THE IT ACT 1961 IN THE NAME OF TUKOJI RAO PUAR, DEWAS WHO EXPIRES ON 15.06.15. 2. THE LD. PR. CIT, BHOPAL WAS AWARD THIS FACT THAT HE ALSO ISSUED NOTICE IN THE NAME OF SON AND LR VIKRAM SINH PUAR EARLIER A COPY OF SUCH CORRESPONDENT IS ENCLOSED AS PER ANNEXURE D. 3. THE LD. PR. CIT, BHOPAL ERRED IMPOSING THE ORDER IN THE NAME OF DEATH PERSON AND THIS IS BAD IN LAW AND EVEN IT DESERVED TO BE QUASHED. 4.THE LD. PR. CIT, BHOPAL ERRED IN STATING THAT TH E AO PASSES ORDER IN HEST IN THE MONTH OF MARCH WITHOUT CONSIDE RING THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL GAIN AND AMOUNT OF GIFTS. THE INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER REFERENCE IS BEING CARRIED SIMULTANEOUSLY BEFORE AO -DEWAS AND AP-BHOPAL SINCE 2012. THE REQUIRED INFORMATION WERE FILED EARLIER WHICH I S CLEAR ON THE LATTER DATED 25.09.2012 AS PER ANNEXURE-E. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT ) WAS COMPLETED ON 31.03.2014 BY THE AO. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE LD. PR. CIT AFTER EXAMINATION OF RECORDS BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 263 OF THE ACT REVISED THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED BY THE AO ON VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18 TH MARCH, 2016. THE LD. PR. CIT DIRECTED THE AO REFRAME THE ASSESSMENT. IT IS PERTAINED TO NOTE THA T THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED AGAINST THE TUKOJI RAO PUAR W HO DIED ON 19.06.2015 AS PER THE DEATH CERTIFICATS ISSUED BY I NDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. GROUND NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE AGAINST THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY OF THE ORDER. VIKRAM SINGH PUAR 3 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS NULLITY IN THE EYES OF LAW AS TO THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED AGAINST DEAD PERSON. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENT ION TO THE NOTICE DATED 10.03.2016, WHICH IS ADDRESSED TO SHRI VIKRAM SINH PUAR THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. FATEHLAL (2007) 7 ITJ 670 (MP), IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT THE ORDER PASSED AGAINST THE DEAD PERSON IS NULLITY. THE LD. DR OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED TH E ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE UNDISPUTED FACT ON RECORD ARE THAT THE N OTICE DATED 10.03.2016 WAS ISSUED TO SHRI VIKRAM SINH PUAR, LE GAL HEIR OF SHRI TUKOJI RAO PUAR. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT SHR I TUKOJI RAO PUAR EXPIRED ON 19 TH JUNE 2015. A CERTIFICATE TO THIS EFFECT IS ENCLOSE D IN THE PAPER BOOK. THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED ON 18 .03.2016, I.E. SUBSEQUENT TO THE DEATH OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS RECO RDED BY THE LD. PR. CIT THAT NOTICE DATED 10 TH MARCH 2016 WAS ISSUED. WE FIND THAT THIS NOTICE WAS ADDRESSED TO THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED TUKOJI RAO PUAR. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT THE CASE WHERE THE P R. CIT WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DEATH OF THE ASSESSEE. IN FACT HE HIMS ELF HAD ISSUED A NOTICE TO THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE. IT IS SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT ANY ORDER PASSED AGAINST THE D EAD PERSON IS VIKRAM SINGH PUAR 4 NULLITY. THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN T HE CASE OF CIT VS. FATEHLAL HELD AS UNDER: THE TRIBUNAL DECLINED TO STATE THE CASE AND HELD A S UNDER: IN THE EVENT OF DEATH OF AN ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, I T IS SETTLED LAW THAT IT IS THE DUTY OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER TO MA KE DILIGENT INQUIRY TO ASCERTAIN THE LEGAL HEIRS AND SERVE NOTI CES ON THEM BEFORE COMPLETING AN ASSESSMENT ON THE ESTATE OF TH E DECEASED ASSESSEE. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CA SE, THE EXACT POSITION WAS KNOWN TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AND ST ILL HE CHOSE TO MAKE AN INVALID ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF FATEHL AL AND DID NOT IMPLEAD IN THE PROCEEDINGS THE REAL LEGAL HEIR, SMT. KAMLABAI. THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 COULD NOT MAKE THE ALREADY INVALID ORDER PASSED TO BE VALID. CONSE QUENTLY, THERE IS FORCE IN THE PRAYER MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSMENT MADE HAD TO BE ANNULLED AND NOT SET ASIDE. WE ANNUL THE ASSESSMENT AND ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE. THERE IS NO NEED TO GO INTO THE GROUNDS ON THE MERI TS WHICH WERE NOT GONE INTO BY THE APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMI SSIONER ALSO. 5. IN JAI PRAKASH SINGH VS. CIT (1978) 111 ITR 507 (GAUHATI) IT IS LAID DOWN THAT IF THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED ASSES SEE IS TO BE ASSESSED TO INCOME TAX, THE STATED MUST BE FULLY RE PRESENTED BY IMPLEADING ALL THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES BY SERVING NOTICES UNDER SECTION 143(2) AND THAT IN DEFAULT OF SUCH A PROCEDURE, THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WOULD BE INVALID AND WOU LD BECOME LIABLE TO BE ANNULLED. 6. WE ARE SATISFIED WITH THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE QUESTIONS, AS PROPOSED, THUS DO NOT A RISE OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE HEREBY QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER, BEING NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. VIKRAM SINGH PUAR 5 5. GROUND NOS. 4 TO 6 ARE ON MERIT OF THE CASE AS W E HAVE ALREADY QUASHED THE ORDER. THESE GROUNDS HAVE BECOME ACADEM IC AND NEEDS NO SEPARATE ADJUDICATION ON THESE GROUNDS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA N O.407/IND/2014 IS ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09 .03. 2018. SD/- (MANISH BORAD) SD/- (KUL BHARAT) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER INDORE; DATED : 09 / 03/2018 CTX? P.S/. . . COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUA RD FILE. BY ORDER PRIVATE SECRETARY/DDO, INDORE