Legal heirs are not liable for tax assessments based on transactions after the original dealer's death, especially if managed by a successor under a new registration.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the wife and legal heir of One K.A.Sreenivasan, who was a registered dealer under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 on the rolls of the 1^st respondent herein. Admittedly, K.A.Sreenivasan having died during November, 2011, the registration certificate was also canceled. Even thereafter, the assessment order at Ext.P1 with respect to the assessment year 2012-13 was passed against the petitioner herein in her capacity as one of the legal heirs of the deceased essentially contending that unaccounted sale to the tune of Rs.9,21,662/- was effected from the registration of the deceased during the year 2012- 13. Output tax liability with respect to the above figure was sought to be demanded along with interest by Ext.P1 order. An appeal was preferred against the assessment order before the first appellate authority contending that, after the death of the original assessee, his son obtained a fresh registration and was continuing the business and the transaction noticed in Ext.P1 was actually effected by the son. The first appellate authority considered the afore submission and issued an order at Ext.P2 finding as under:-

“Heard the learned counsel of the appellant together with connected records and evidences produced and also available in the file. The main contention of the learned counsel was that in the case of sales suppression detected by the assessing authority for Rs.9,21,662/- the appellant verified the books of accounts and found that some of the sales were effected to M/s. TELK Angamaly from the new firm started by the son of the appellant having TIN 32151258641. At the time of entering the purchase bills in the KVATIS module by the purchasing company M/S.TELK, they entered TIN 32151347594 instead of TIN 32151258641. The new firm remitted the entire tax collected from the consignee M/s. TELK through the monthly returns filed. Copy of the declaration obtained from the M/s. TELK, Angamaly is also produced and verified. The assessing authority has not considered the matter at the time of finalization of assessment.

Hence the appeal is allowed and the assessing authority is directed to modify the assessment deleting the above sales turnover from the assessment since those belong to another dealer.”

2. However, the assessing authority sought to issue the notices at Exts.P3 and P3(a) directing the petitioner to appear for a personal hearing along with “documents mentioned in appellate order”. However, since the petitioner did not respond, the assessing authority issued Ext.P4 dated 22.05.2023 restoring the assessment at Ext.P1. It is seeking to challenge Ext.P4 order issued as above that the petitioner has instituted this writ petition.

3. Heard Sri.Aji V.Dev, the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Smt.Jasmine, the learned Government Pleader.

4. It is a sustainability or other wise of Ext.P4 that requires to be considered in this writ petition. This Court notices that the petitioner had contended before the first appellate authority that the transactions for Rs.9,21,662/- happened to be effected by her son, who continued the business with a new TIN No.32151258641. However, the purchaser (M/s.TELK) had unfortunately shown the TIN of the deceased in their accounts and that is why the assessment came to be issued against the legal heir. This has been positively found and the appellate authority by Ext.P2 has allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner directing the assessing authority to modify the assessment by “deleting the sales turnover” from the assessment. The appellate authority also found that such an order is required since turnover actually belongs to another dealer.

5. When such positive directions were issued, the assessing authority could not have venture