A Section 148 notice issued to a deceased assessee is invalid absent unobjected submission by the legal representative.

The Income Tax Officer issued a notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 30 March 2019 to Late Vinodbhai Hirabhai Patel, who had died on 26 February 2017.

A subsequent notice under Section 142(1), dated 6 August 2019, was also issued in the deceased’s name, requiring him to file a return. The petitioner, the deceased’s legal representative, informed the Assessing Officer of the death and objected to the validity of the proceedings.

The objections were rejected on 21 October 2019, and notices proposing an addition of ₹9,97,994 were issued.

Despite a further objection dated 23 October 2019, the Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Sections 144 read with 147, assessing total income at ₹5,05,55,465 and raising a demand of ₹4,34,48,210 under Section 156. The petitioner challenged the notice, objection-rejection order, assessment order and demand notice.

1. Whether reassessment proceedings initiated by issuing a notice under Section 148 in the name of a person who had already died were invalid and non-est in law.

2. Whether the legal representative’s communication informing the Assessing Officer of the assessee’s death amounted to submission to the jurisdiction or participation sufficient to validate the proceedings.

Section 148 of the Income-tax Act authorises reassessment only through a legally valid notice, while Section 159 governs the liability and assessment of the legal representative of a deceased assessee.

The Court held that a notice under Section 148 issued against a dead person is invalid unless the legal representative submits to the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction without objection.

The Court relied on Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel v. Income Tax Officer, (2019) 101 taxmann.com 362 (Gujarat), concerning the invalidity of reassessment proceedings initiated against a deceased assessee.

Urmilaben Anirudhhasinhji Jadeja v. Income Tax Officer, [2020] 117 taxmann.com 504 (Gujarat), which held that merely informing the Assessing Officer that the notice was issued in the name of a deceased person does not constitute participation in the proceedings; participation may be inferred where the legal representative files a return or otherwise submits to jurisdiction.

The notice under Section 148 and the subsequent notice under Section 142(1) were issued in the name of Vinodbhai Hirabhai Patel more than two years after his death.

The petitioner promptly informed the Assessing Officer of the death and consistently objected to the proceedings, rather than filing a return or submitting to jurisdiction.

Applying the principles in Chandreshbhai and Urmilaben, the Court held that the petitioner’s communications were only objections to an invalid notice and could not be treated as participation validating the reassessment.

Consequently, the foundation of the reassessment proceedings was legally defective, and the subsequent orders and demand could not survive.

The Court reserved liberty to the Revenue to reopen or initiate proceedings against the petitioner, if otherwise permissible in accordance with Section 159 of the Act.