Top Stories GST Assessment Proceedings in name of Deceased Assessee: Kerala HC directs to pass Fresh Assessment order [Read Order] The court viewed that the proceeding cannot take place in the name of the deceased mother of the appellant as he is not inheriting the business of the mother By Yogitha S. Yogesh – On March 11, 2024 4:06 pm – 2 mins read The Kerala High court directed to pass a fresh assessment order under the Goods and Service Tax Act ( GST ), 2017 as the assessment proceedings were in the name of the deceased assessee. The appellant’s business and his mother’s business are two different businesses, though their names are similar.

The proceeding cannot take place in the name of the deceased mother of the appellant as he is not inheriting the business of the mother. Vikas A Shah, the petitioner challenged the assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent against his deceased mother for the financial years 2017-2018 and 20182019. The appellant’s mother, the late Vasanti Anil Kumar Shah, was running a proprietorship concern under the name and style “International Agencies”, which was engaged in the business of copra and other allied oil products. It was registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and service tax ( CGST/SGST ) Act, 2017.

The appellant’s mother passed away on 2/12/2018. On her death, the father of the appellant, Sri. Anil Kumar Shah was designated as the authorised signatory for the closure activities of the business held by the appellant’s mother. He also passed away on 21/2/2021. The 1st respondent initiated assessment proceedings under the GST Act against the mother of the appellant for the period July 2017 to March 2018, and to that end, a show cause notice was issued in the name of the deceased mother of the appellant. It is alleged that despite the objection raised by the appellant that the assessment proceedings cannot be continued in the name of his deceased mother, the 1st respondent concluded the assessment proceedings and passed the impugned orders. The Single Judge found that the appellant had succeeded in the business of his mother. However, because the appellant could not participate in the assessment proceedings and the impugned assessment orders were passed ex parte, they were set aside, and the assessing officer was directed to pass a fresh assessment order by the law after hearing the appellant with a rider that the appellant shall not raise the question of limitation. The counsel for the appellant submitted that the Single Judge proceeded to dispose of the writ petition on the assumption that the appellant had admitted that he had inherited his mother’s business. According to the counsel, the appellant had never admitted that he succeeded in the business of his mother. It is his case that after the death of his mother, he started his own business in the name of International Agencies with a different registered address.

The appellant stated that his business and his mother’s business are two different businesses, though their names are similar. The appellant can very well take up his said plea regarding the noninheritance of his mother’s business as well as the plea of limitation before the assessing officer. A division bench comprising Dr Justice A K Jayasankaran Nambiar & Dr Justice Kauser Edappagath directed that the assessing officer shall consider those pleas untrammelled by any observations in the impugned judgment and pass fresh orders by the law after hearing the appellant. Srikanth Thamban, Abhilash B, Firdouse K K And Sravan M S appeared for the petitioner. The respondent was represented by Sr GP VK Shamsudheen.