Assessment Order Passed in Name of Deceased Assessee

Assessment Order Passed in Name of Deceased Assessee Is Null and Void in Law

Issue

Whether a reassessment/fresh assessment order passed under Section 153A read with Section 144 in the name of a deceased assessee is legally sustainable.

Facts

Assessment Year: Assessment Year 2014-15.
Original Proceedings: The assessee filed the original return of income for AY 2014-15. Following a search under Section 132 in the case of J.R. Agro Group, an assessment was completed under Section 153A read with Section 143(3).
Demise of Assessee: The assessee passed away on 21-07-2022.
Remand by Tribunal: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Issuance of Notices: In the second round of proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notices under Section 142(1), letters, and a show-cause notice in the name of the deceased assessee.
Assessment Completed: The Assessing Officer completed the fresh assessment under Section 153A read with Sections 144 and 254 directly in the name of the deceased individual rather than bringing the legal representatives on record.

Decision

Since the assessee was not in existence on the date of framing the second-round assessment, an assessment order framed in the name of a deceased person has no legs to stand in the eyes of the law.
The notices issued and the entire assessment proceedings completed in the name of the deceased assessee were held to be null and void [Paras 6 and 7].
The issue was decided entirely in favor of the assessee.

Key Takeaways

Incurable Procedural Defect: Issuing statutory notices and passing an assessment order against a deceased person constitutes a jurisdictional defect that cannot be cured under the Act.
Mandatory Substitution of Legal Heirs: Upon the death of an assessee during pending proceedings, the Assessing Officer is statutorily bound to serve notice on and bring the legal representatives on record before framing an assessment.
Nullity of Proceedings: Any assessment order framed directly on a deceased individual without impleading legal heirs is void ab initio and liable to be quashed.

IN THE ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH

Raman Kumar Aggarwal

ACIT /DCIT

Udayan Dasgupta, Judicial Member
and M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member

IT APPEAL No. 936 (ASR) OF 2025
[Assessment year 2014-15]

JULY 31, 2026

Rohit Kapoor and V.S. Aggarwal, ITPs for the Appellant. Smt. Kulwinder Kaur, Sr. DR for the Respondent.

ORDER

M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member.- This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18.09.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana [herein referred to as’ ld. CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2. Vide ground No.2, the assessee is challenging the framing of assessment u/s 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in the name of dead person thereby rendering the entire proceedings null and void. This ground goes to the root of the matter and hence is taken up first for adjudication.

3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The original return of income was filed by the assessee Raman Kumar Aggarwal on 25.09.2014 declaring taxable income of Rs. 15,66,280/-. A search and seizure operation was carried out U/s 132 of the Act in the case of J.R. Agro Group on 09.09.2015. The original search assessment was completed U/s 153A of the Act r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2017 in the name of Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal for A.Y. 2014-15. The assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which stood dismissed vide order dated 30.11.2018. The assessee preferred appeal before he Tribunal.

4. The Tribunal in the first round restored the appeal to the file of ld. Assessing Officer vide its order dated 23.09.2023. When the appeal was pending before the Tribunal, the assessee Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal expired on 21.7.2022. Thereafter, proceedings stood initiated in the second round vide notice U/s 142(1) of the Act on 23.09.2024 which was followed by letter dt. 03.10.2024, show cause notice dt 21.10.2024 and letter dated 08.11.2024. All these aforesaid notices according to ld. AR were issued in the name of late Sh Raman Kumar Aggarwal (deceased). The search assessment in the second round stood completed u/s 153A r.w.s. 144 and 254 dated 29.11.2024 in the name of Raman Kumar Aggarwal who was not in existence at all as on the date of passing of the order as he had expired already on 21.07.2022.

5. It pertinent to note that the assessment order was framed U/s 144 of the Act due to non-cooperation from the side of the assessee by way of non- representation. However, in the statement of facts filed before the ld. CIT(A), it has categorically been mentioned that Raman Kumar Aggarwal had already expired as on the date of framing of the assessment. The ld. CIT(A) in page 12 paragraph 6.2.1(ii) had addressed this issue by stating that “the plea of the assessee that assessment has been framed against a deceased person is not tenable, as the assessee was alive during the course of assessment, and the present appeal has been validly pursued by the legal heir”. This clearly goes to prove that that ld. CIT(A) was very much aware of the following facts: –

(a)

assessment in the second round has been framed in the name of deceased; and

(b)

Appeal has been filed by the legal heir of late Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal.

Despite this fact, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to pass the appellate order confirming the addition made in the re-assessment orders framed in the name of the deceased.

6. The above facts clearly prove that as on the date of framing of assessment in the second round of proceedings, Shri Raman Kumar Aggarwal was not existent since he had already died on 21.07.2022. Hence, the search assessment framed in the name of the deceased person would have no legs to stand in the eyes of law. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Savita Kapila v. Asstt. CIT 426 ITR 502 (Delhi);Vipin Walia v. ITO 382 ITR 19 (Delhi), Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Prabhawati Gupta [1998] 231 ITR 188 (Madhya Pradesh), Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Shini Shajan v. Pr. CIT [2025] (Kerala) and decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Chandreshbhai jayantibhai Patel v. ITO 413 ITR 276 (Gujarat).

7. In view of the above, the ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed and we hold the entire assessment proceedings for assessment year 2014-15 to be null and void. Since the entire assessment is quashed as void ab initio, the adjudication of other grounds became academic in nature and they are left to open.

8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.