LAXMI JAIN W/O LATE SHRI VINOD JAIN V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

CW/21512/2019

AI Insights

The case involves a writ petition filed by Laxmi Jain and her sons, Shobit and Rahul Jain, challenging a demand notice and a re-assessment order issued by the Income Tax Department. The primary contention was that the re-assessment proceedings were initiated against a deceased person, which is legally impermissible. The respondents did not dispute this fact but referred to a similar case (DBCWP No.15115/2022) where the court had allowed re-initiation of proceedings against the legal heirs. The court, following the precedent set in the mentioned case, allowed the petition, recognizing the initial proceedings as a nullity and granting the Department the liberty to re-initiate the process against the legal representatives.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 672420 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Shri Radha Mohan Khandelwal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Legal Heirs of Smt. Sneh Lata Bhandari Vs. Income tax Officers & Ors.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP PATHAK; ARNAV SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY SHARMA
• Keywords: Quashing of demand notice; Re-assessment order; Proceedings against dead person; Nullity of proceedings
• Section: 148A; 159

Judgement Text

"[2024:RJ-JP:21242-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21512/2019 1. Laxmi Jain W/o Late Shri Vinod Jain, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of At Flat No. 501, 5Th Floor, A-25/26, Lakshawdeep Apartments, Sethi Colony, Jaipur. 2. Shobit Jain S/o Late Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of At Flat No. 501, 5Th Floor, A-25/26, Lakshawdeep Apartments, Sethi Colony, Jaipur. 3. Rahul Jain S/o Late Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of At Flat No. 501, 5Th Floor, A-25/26, Lakshawdeep Apartments, Sethi Colony, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-5, Jaipur. 3. Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak with Mr. Arnav Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 06/05/2024 1. This petition is filed seeking quashing of demand notice dated 15.11.2019 and the re-assessment order dated 11.11.2019. 2. The ground for seeking quashing of re-assessment proceedings is that the reassessment proceedings were initiated against a dead person. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to dispute that the reassessment notice was issued to a dead person. [2024:RJ-JP:21242-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-21512/2019] However, submits that the petition be disposed of in view of the order dated 22.03.2024 passed by this Court in DBCWP No.15115/2022, by granting similar liberty to respondent. 4. The order dated 22.03.2024 is reproduced below:- “1. Heard. 2. The short issue arising for consideration in this case is whether the proceedings initiated under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act by issuing notices under Clause (b) therein, culminating in passing of an order under Clause (d) thereof, would be a nullity as the notices were initially issued against a dead person. 3. On this issue, learned counsel for the parties bring to the notice of this Court an order dated 27.05.2022 passed by Division Bench of this Court at Jaipur in Shri Radha Mohan Khandelwal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [D.B Civil Writ Petition No7896/2022] as also another order dated 27.02.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court in Legal Heirs of Smt. Sneh Lata Bhandari Vs. Income tax Officers & Ors. [D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9985/2023]. 4. After going through the said orders, the legal position is no longer res integra and it can be declared that notices and proceedings against dead person would be a nullity. 5. In the case of Legal Heirs of Smt. Sneh Lata Bhandari (supra), the Division Bench of this Court has also granted liberty to the Department to re-initiate the proceedings under Section 148A(b) and Section 159 of the IT Act with specific order that the limitation period between the filing of the writ petition and till its disposal shall be excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation period for initiating such proceedings. 6. We are of the view that if the date on which initially notices were issued, which have been successfully assailed here, were within the period of limitation, there is no reason as to why the Department should not be given [2024:RJ-JP:21242-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-21512/2019] that liberty to take the proceedings under the provisions of law against the legal representatives in view of the provisions contained in Section 159 of the IT Act. 7. Therefore, granting liberty to the Department to proceed in accordance with law by re-initiating proceedings under the law, this petition is allowed.” 5. This writ petition is allowed in terms of order passed in DBCWP No.15115/2022. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Simple Kumawat /33 "