LATE LAL SINGH THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SH BALWINDER SINGH Vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is for quashing the revisional order passed under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (in short, "the Principal CIT") dated 14.06.2018, Annexure P.4 and the re-assessment order dated 16.11.2017, Annexure P.2, rejecting the claim of petitioner for annulling the re-assessment proceedings against the dead person without bringing the legal heirs on record and complying with the provisions of Section 24-B of the Income Tax Act, 1922 (in short, "the 1922 Act").

(2.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the petition may be noticed. The assessee-Lal Singh (since deceased) was a Government employee and resident of Village Kumbra, District Mohali. The present petition is being filed by Balwinder Singh, legal heir of the assessee-Late Lal Singh. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2017 i.e. after the death of the assessee in his name asking explanation for cash deposit of Rs. 5,80,000/- made during the period from 1.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. The said notice was returned un-served. The second notice was issued on 20.06.2017 and the same was returned by postal authorities with the remarks that the assessee was dead. The Department again issued another notice under Section 142(1) of the Act requiring the filing of return of income from a deceased person. The proceedings continued without bringing on record the legal heirs of the deceased. Presently, the case is being represented by the son of the deceased in representative capacity as one of the legal heir. Return of income was filed by him on 08.11.2017 in order to cooperate with the Government notices in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act declaring income of Rs. 1,23,000/- and agricultural income of Rs. 40,000/-. The assessee's son appeared for hearing and was required to explain the details of amounts of cash deposited in the account of the assessee from 1.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. Though no notice was served on the son of the assessee, but being cooperative, certain information was submitted to the department by him like death certificate of the assessee, detail of the amount of Rs. 3,10,000/- which was given by assessee to his son-in-law Sh. Kuldeep Sharma on 06.11.2008 which was returned to the assessee in March 2009 by way of payment of Rs. 4,50,000/- in cash and affidavit dated 14.11.2017 substantiating the aforesaid transaction. The Assessing Officer made an addition of the whole amount including interest i.e. Rs. 6,71,300/- under Section 68 of the Act, vide order dated 16.11.2017, Annexure P. Aggrieved by the order, an application under Section 264 of the Act was filed by the assessee's son with a prayer to revise the order being prejudicial and illegal inter alia stating that his father expired on 04.03.2015 and certificate of his death was filed on 13.11.2017. It was further pleaded that a deceased person cannot be assessed without appointing legal heir. Vide order dated 14.06.2018, Annexure P.4, the Principal CIT rejected the application under Section 264 of the Act filed by the assessee. Hence the instant petition before this Court by the petitioner-son of the deceased assessee.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.