Wp(C)/34850/2023 Of N. Binoj v. Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH TUESDAY, THE 31 DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1945WP(C) NO. 34850 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S: 1N. BINOJAGED 50 YEARSS/O LATE NARINGAPARAMBIL BHASKARAN, NARINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANGADIPURAM, ANGADIPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679321 2SAVITHRIAGED 75 YEARSW/O LATE NARINGAPARAMBIL BHASKARAN, NARINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANGADIPURAM, ANGADIPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 6793213SANOOJAGED 43 YEARSS/O LATE NARINGAPARAMBIL BHASKARAN, NARINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANGADIPURAM, ANGADIPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 6793214ANOOJ NARINGAPARAMBILAGED 48 YEARSS/O LATE NARINGAPARAMBIL BHASKARAN, NARINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ANGADIPURAM, ANGADIPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679321 BY ADVS.LATHA ANANDS.VISHNU (ARIKKATTIL) RESPONDENT/S: 1INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, TIRUR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, NO 20/1240, TARIFF BAZAR, TOWN HALL ROAD, TIRUR, KERALA, PIN -676101 WP(C) NO. 34850 OF 2023 2THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTERMAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC)., PIN - 110001MAYUR BHAWAN, CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (NAFAC)., PIN - 110001 3ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, MAYUR BHAWAN,CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA, NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001INCOME TAX/INCOME-TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, MAYUR BHAWAN,CONNAUGHT LANE, BARAKHAMBA, NEW DELHI., PIN - 110001 OTHER PRESENT: SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM -SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 31.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J U D G M E N T The present writ petition has been filed bythe legal heirs of late Sri.NaringaparambilBhaskaran, challenging the proceedings for re-assessment initiated pursuant to Ext.P4 noticeunder Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961('Act', for short). 2.Late Sri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran, whodied on 30.10.2021, was an assessee under theprovisions of the Act. Show cause notice, Ext.P2,dated 27.3.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the Actwas served in the name of late Sri.NaringaparambilBhaskaran on his address, with respect to theassessment year 2019-2020. The first petitionerinformed the assessing officer about the death ofhis father, Sri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran. Itappears that the first petitioner had filed replyto the said show cause notice being the legal heirof late Sri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran. However,the said reply has not been placed on record before WP(C) NO. 34850 OF 2023 this Court. The first petitioner was heard andthereafter the order under Section 148A(d) waspassed on 10.4.2023, Ext.P3. Thereafter, the firstrespondent issued notice under Section 148 of theAct, Ext.P4, dated 10.4.2023. After seven monthsof the order under Section 148A(d) and notice underSection 148 of the Act, Exts.P3 and P4respectively, the petitioners have approached thisCourt on the ground that no fresh notice was issuedto them being the legal heirs of lateSri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran. Even the orderunder Section 148A(d) and the notice under Section148 of the Act are in the name of the deceasedassessee, late Sri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran. Itis therefore submitted that since the proceedingsare against a dead person, the same are liable tobe set aside and if the Department wants to proceedin respect of the income of the deceasedSri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran, the Departmentshould issue notice to his legal heirs. 3.Sri.Christopher Abraham, learned StandingCounsel for the Income Tax Department, submits thatthe first petitioner did not only respond to theshow cause notice, but he was also heard beforeorder, Ext.P3, under Section 148A(d) was passed on10.4.2023, and thereafter notice, Ext.P4, underSection 148 was issued. The petitioners haveapproached this Court as a legal strategy to knockout the proceedings on the ground of limitation.They were aware of the order under Section 148A(d)as well as notice under Section 148 and waited fora period of seven months to approach this Court forsetting aside the said order and notice.Sri.Christopher Abraham, learned Standing Counselfor the Department, submits that this Court shouldnot interfere with the proceedings, since the firstpetitioner had participated in the proceedings andhe filed reply to the show cause notice underSection 148A(b) and was heard before the order,Ext.P3, under Section 148A(d) was passed on10.4.2023. WP(C) NO. 34850 OF 2023 4.I have considered the submissions of bothsides. 5.From the order impugned dated 10.4.2023,Ext.P3, issued under Section 148A(d) of the Act, itappears that the first petitioner had filed replyto the show cause notice issued in the name of hislate father and was also heard. The notice underSection 148, Ext.P4, which also was of the samedate, i.e. 10.4.2023, is in the names of lateSri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran and the firstpetitioner, who is the son/legal heir of lateSri.Naringaparambil Bhaskaran. The petitionerscannot take a stand before this Court that sincethe show cause notice, Ext.P2, under Section148A(b) was not in their names, subsequent ordersand notice under Sections 148A(b) and 148,respectively, cannot be passed and issued to them.Since the first petitioner had already participatedin the proceedings by not only filing reply to theshow cause notice but also having been heard, thissubmission does not lie in the mouth of the petitioners and therefore, the same is liable to berejected. The petitioners were not only aware ofthe proceedings, but also had participated in theproceedings. Therefore, the said contention isrejected. 6.The order dated 10.4.2023, Ext.P3, passedSection 148A(d) of the Act would disclose thatafter considering the reply and submissions of thefirst petitioner, the assessing officer is of theopinion that the assessment for the year 2019-2020is required to be reopened under Section 147 byissuing notice under Section 148 of the Act andthat the proceedings under Section 148 of the Actwould continue in the hands of the legal heirs ofthe assessee. 7.In view of the above, I do not find anyground to entertain the present writ petition. Thepetitioners were granted 30 days time from theservice of the notice under Section 148 of the Actto file return in the prescribed form for theassessment year 2019-2020. The said time period has already expired. The petitioners are thereforegranted 30 days further time from today to filereturn in pursuance to the notice, Ext.P4, underSection 148 of the Act. If they file return asabove, the assessing authority will consider thesame, in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, the presentwrit petition stands finally disposed of. Pendinginterlocutory application, if any, in the writpetition stands dismissed. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE WP(C) NO. 34850 OF 2023 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34850/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 24/11/2021 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27/03/2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/04/2023 UNDER SECTION 148A(D) OF THE ACT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10/04/2023 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 OF THE ACT