Proceedings Against Deceased Person Under GST Held Invalid

Case Details

• Case Title: Satendra Kumar v. State of U.P. & Others

• Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

• Petition Number: Writ Tax No. 1728 of 2025

• Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC:62525-DB

• Date of Judgment: 21.04.2025

• Category of Dispute: GST Demand – Proceedings against deceased assessee

• Relevant Sections: Section 74, Section 93 of CGST/UPGST Act, 2017

Facts of the Case (Paras 2–4)

• The petitioner Satendra Kumar is the son of late Surendra Kumar, proprietor of M/s S.K. Industry.

• Surendra Kumar passed away on 17.02.2021. His wife applied for cancellation of GST registration, which was accepted on 29.07.2022.

• Despite knowledge of death and cancellation, the Department issued a show cause notice dated 12.09.2022 under Section 74 and passed an ex parte order dated 10.03.2023 for tax period May 2018 – Sept 2018.

• These notices and orders were only uploaded on the GST portal, hence unknown to the legal heirs. The wife also later expired, and the present writ petition was filed by the son challenging the proceedings.

Questions in Consideration (Paras 4–5)

1. Whether proceedings under Section 74 of CGST/UPGST Act can be initiated against a deceased person?

2. Whether the liability of tax under Section 93 permits determination against the estate of a deceased without notice to legal heirs?

Observation of the Court (Paras 5–7)

• The Court relied on Amit Kumar Sethia (Deceased) v. State of U.P. (Writ Tax No. 917 of 2025, decided 02.04.2025) which clarified that:

  • Section 93 deals only with liability of legal representatives but does not authorize determination of tax against a dead person.

  • A show cause notice must be issued to legal heirs before any determination.

• Since both SCN and order were issued against a deceased proprietor, the entire proceedings were bad in law.

• Authorities could have proceeded against legal heirs properly but failed to do so.

Judgment of the Court (Paras 6–8)

• The show cause notice dated 12.09.2022 and order dated 10.03.2023 were quashed and set aside.

• Liberty granted to authorities to proceed against the legal representatives in accordance with law, if deemed fit.

• Writ petition allowed.

Between Fine Lines (Simple Summary in 5 Lines)

1. GST proceedings were wrongly initiated against a person who had already died.

2. Section 93 only creates liability for heirs but does not allow orders against a dead person.

3. Authorities failed to issue notice to legal heirs, making the entire action void.

4. Court quashed both SCN and demand order.

5. However, the Department can start fresh proceedings against legal heirs, if required.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”