Vinodbhai Shamjibhai Sagpariya v. Income Tax Officer Ward - 2 (1)(1) Rkt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABADR/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23112 of 2022 ========================================================== VINODBHAI SHAMJIBHAI SAGPARIYA Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 (1)(1) RKT ========================================================== Appearance: MR FENIL H MEHTA(11663) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1MR NIKUNT RAVAL(1046) ASSISTED BY MR KARAN SHANGANI for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI andHONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATTDate : 21/12/2022ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) 1. The action of the respondent since has aggrieved the petitioner, it has approached this Court by way of the present petitionwhere this Court while issuing the noticeon 22.11.2022 passed the following order: “1.Present petition is filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India seeking following reliefs: “(a) quash and set aside the impugned noticesand orders at Annexure- 'A', 'B1’, ‘B2;’, 'C', 'D1’,‘D2’, ‘D3’, ‘D4’, ‘D5’', ‘D6’ to this Petition; (b) pending the admission, hearing and finaldisposal of this petition, to stay implementation and operation of the orders at Annexure C to thispetition and stay further proceedings of recoveryfor A.Y. 2013-14; (c) any other and further relief deemed just andproper be granted in the interest of justice;(d) to provide for the cost of this petition.” 2.It is the case of the petitioner that the notice isissued to the deceased, who passed away on20.08.2017. 3.Notice for final disposal, returnable on13.12.2022. 4.By way of interim relief, it is directed that theprocess of assessment shall continue with thecooperation of the petitioner, however, the finalassessment order shall not be passed before thereturnable date. 5.Over and above the regular mode of service,service of notice through e-mode on the official e-mailID is permitted.” 2. We have heard the learned advocate, Mr.Fenil Mehta for the petitioner, who has drawn the attention of this Court that the death of the father of the petitioner had been communicated to the department on29.03.2019, the death had occurred on20.08.2017. It was a request to allow himto be a legal heir with PAN No. .The said request had also been allowed on30.03.2019 and yet the authority concernedhad continued to issue the notice upon thedeath person. 2.1He has also relied on the decision ofthis Court in case of Kanubhai JinabhaiPatel vs. Income-tax Officer, reported in[2022] 139 taxmann.com 580 (Guj.) and alsoon the decision of the Delhi High Court incase of Savita Kapila vs. AssistantCommissioner, reported in [2020] 118taxmann.com 46 (Delhi). 3. Learned senior standing counsel, Mr.Raval assisted by the learned advocate, Mr.Karan Sanghani does not dispute the fact of the department having been communicatedthis well in time on 29.03.2019 and grantedits approval of 30.03.2019. 4. The show cause notice has been issuedon 10.03.2022 and the father of petitioneron 10.03.2022 and the father of petitioner (since deceased) had passed away on 20.08.2017, the intimation had already been sent on 29.03.2019 and therefore, any notice subsequent thereto after therespondent had acknowledged the same andhad approved the request on 30.03.2019 isvoid ab initio and hence, the petitiondeserves to be allowed. 5. We notice that two notices under Sections 148 and 142(1) of the IT Act and the final show cause notices for the assessment year 2012-13 had been issued,which all culminated into the passing of anassessment order, which is impugned in thepresent petition. 6. Resultantly, this petition is allowedquashing and setting aside the order of assessment dated 22.03.2022 for the assessment year 2013-14 and all consequential notices. 7. Over and above the regular mode ofservice, direct service through e-mode onofficial email address is also permitted. (SONIA GOKANI, J) sent on 29.03.2019 and therefore, any notice subsequent thereto after therespondent had acknowledged the same andhad approved the request on 30.03.2019 isvoid ab initio and hence, the petitiondeserves to be allowed. 5. We notice that two notices under Sections 148 and 142(1) of the IT Act and the final show cause notices for the assessment year 2012-13 had been issued,which all culminated into the passing of anassessment order, which is impugned in thepresent petition. 6. Resultantly, this petition is allowedquashing and setting aside the order of assessment dated 22.03.2022 for the assessment year 2013-14 and all consequential notices. 7. Over and above the regular mode ofservice, direct service through e-mode onofficial email address is also permitted. (SONIA GOKANI, J) M.M.MIRZA (MAUNA M. BHATT,J)