held by
Hon’ble High Court of Madras
In the matter of
Rekha. S, Kavitha. S and others Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) Chennai passed vide W.P.No.35411 of 2023 dated 19th December, 2023
Mr. M K Girish was running the business under the name of M/s M K M & Sons. However, Mr. M K Girish passed away on 25th Feb, 2021 and filed the necessary intimation with GST authority. The Respondent issued a DRC-01 and DRC-01A against the deceased person and issued the impugned assessment order against the deceased person on 1st March, 2023. The Petitioner contended that such assessment order is liable to be aside as assessment proceedings were initiated against a dead person.
The Hon’ble High Court held that The impugned assessment order is passed against the dead person, which is non-est in law and hence, it is liable to be set aside. Further, the petitioners shall consider the notice issued by the respondent dated 06.07.2022 as a notice issued to them and are required to file necessary reply. The respondent can pass the appropriate orders after providing opportunities of personal hearing to the petitioner.
Facts of the case is discussed in detail:
1. Brief Facts of the case
- The petitioners are the legal heir of Mr. M K Grish, who was running a business under name of M/s M. K. M. & Sons.
- However, Mr. M K Grish passed away on 25th Feb, 2021 and same are intimated to the respondent by way of online application.
- The respondent issued a GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-01 against the decreased M K Girish and passed the Assessment order on 1st March, 2023 against the deceased person.
- The Petitioner contended that such assessment order is liable to be aside as assessment proceedings were initiated against a dead person.
Read Also: Procedure of E-Invoice Generation under GST | Brief User Manual
2. Contention of the Respondent
The Respondent contended that:
- GST DRC-01A dated 06.07.2022 and GST DRC-01 dated 21.11.2022 was issued against the dead person.
- Such notices may be treated as notice issued to all the petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the M.K.Girish and the petitioners can file their reply to the such notice accordingly.
- After considering the reply filed by the petitioner, the respondent will pass appropriate orders after providing sufficient opportunities to the petitioners.
3. Contention of the Petitioner
The Petitioner contended that:
- The petitioner accepted the suggestion made by the respondent.
- However, he submitted that since the assessment order is passed against the dead person, the same is liable to be set aside.
4. Decision of the Hon’ble High Court
The Hon’ble High court of Madras held that:
- The impuged assessment order is passed against the dead person, which is non-est in law and hence, it is liable to be set aside.
- Accordingly, the impugned assessment order dated 01.03.2023 is set aside.
- Further, the petitioners shall consider the notice issued by the respondent dated 06.07.2022 as a notice issued to them as on date.
- Therefore, the petitioners are directed to file a reply to the said notice within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
- The respondent can pass the appropriate orders after providing opportunities of personal hearing to the petitioner.
