Kerala HC: Notice Issued Against Dead Person Is Invalid; Participation Of Legal Heirs In Proceedings Doesn't Make It Legal

 Upon hearing the rival submissions of the parties, we are of the view that the Appeal must succeed. The precedents referred above would make it amply clear that the notices issued under Sections 148A(b) and 148 of the Act in the name of a dead person are invalid and 'non-est' in the eye of law. It is a nullity and not a mere irregularity which could be cured. It is true that, on the receipt of the above said notices, the legal heirs of the deceased Naringaparambail Bhaskaran/appellants herein appeared before the assessing authority. However, that by itself would not change the situation. We are of the opinion that the consent of the parties cannot confer jurisdiction to the assessing authority for initiation of an action which is otherwise illegal and 'non-est'.{Para 20}

21. In the light of the above discussions, we cannot agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that the legal heirs of the deceased assessee are estopped from taking a different stand in the writ petition, since they have appeared before the assessing authority and participated in the proceedings. Therefore, we are of the view that the initiation of proceedings against a dead person under Sections 148A(b) and 148 of the Income Tax Act are illegal and 'non-est'.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 2093 of 2023

Decided On: 29.11.2024

N. Binoj and Ors. Vs. Income Tax officer, Ward-2, Tirur and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dr. A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and K.V. Jayakumar, JJ.

Author: K.V. Jayakumar, J.

Citation: MANU/KE/4803/2024.

Print Page

Whether Jurisdiction can conferred on court with consent of parties or by order of superior Court?

 Indisputably, it is a settled legal proposition that conferment of jurisdiction is a legislative function and it can neither be conferred with the consent of the parties nor by a superior Court, and if the Court passes a decree having no jurisdiction over the matter, it would amount to nullity as the matter goes to the roots of the cause. Such an issue can be raised at any stage of the proceedings. The finding of a Court or Tribunal becomes irrelevant and unenforceable/ inexecutable once the forum is found to have no jurisdiction. Similarly, if a Court/Tribunal inherently lacks jurisdiction, acquiescence of party equally should not be permitted to perpetuate and perpetrate, defeating the legislative animation. The Court cannot derive jurisdiction apart from the Statute. In such eventuality the doctrine of waiver also does not apply.1

Supreme Court of India

Dr. Jagmittar Sain Bhagat & Ors. vs Dir. Health Services,Haryana & ... on 11 July, 2013

Print Page