Case Title: Sushil Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Court Name: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Petition No.: Writ Tax No. 1873 of 2025
Relevant Section: Section 73, Section 93 – CGST Act, 2017
Category of Dispute: Recovery/Assessment Proceedings Post Death
Date of Judgment: 28 April 2025
Relevant Provisions: Section 73 and Section 93 of CGST Act, 2017
📝 Facts of the Case [¶1–2]
-
The petitioner, Sushil Kumar Kesarwani, challenged a GST order dated 19.04.2024 issued in the name of his deceased father Ashok Kumar, the proprietor of M/s Sushil Traders [¶1].
-
Ashok Kumar passed away on 15.05.2019, and the GST registration of the firm was cancelled retrospectively from 13.05.2021 by an order dated 24.06.2019 [¶2].
-
Despite the death and cancelled registration, a show cause notice dated 16.12.2023 and a reminder on 02.04.2024 were issued in the name of the deceased. Since these notices were uploaded on the GST portal and no longer accessible due to cancellation, they went unanswered, leading to the demand order [¶2].
❓ Question(s) in Consideration [¶3–4]
-
Whether a valid tax determination under Section 73 of the CGST Act can be made against a deceased person without issuing a show cause notice to the legal heir?
-
Whether Section 93 authorizes recovery without prior adjudication involving the legal representative?
🔍 Observations of the Court [¶6–9]
-
The Court observed that Section 93 addresses recovery of tax post-death either if business is continued or discontinued, but does not authorize determination of liability against a deceased person [¶6–7].
-
For legal recovery to ensue, show cause notice must be served to the legal representative and determination must be made against the living legal heir, not the deceased [¶8].
-
As no such notice was served to the petitioner, the order against the deceased was void ab initio [¶9].
🧾 Judgement of the Court [¶10]
-
The Allahabad High Court quashed the demand order dated 19.04.2024 issued against the deceased Ashok Kumar.
-
Liberty was granted to the Department to initiate fresh proceedings, if necessary, in accordance with law against the legal representative [¶10].
📌 Between Fine Lines:
-
GST demands cannot be raised against a deceased person without first issuing notice to their legal heir.
-
The Department must follow Section 93 in letter and spirit—only the legal heir can be made party to recovery.
-
Any determination against a dead person is void from inception.
-
GST portal-based notices don’t suffice when registration is cancelled.
-
The Department retains liberty to proceed afresh but must do so lawfully.
📚 Summary of Referred Cases
| Name | Citation | Summary | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| No external cases referred | – | – | – |
