Case Details: P.B. Sethi Plastics vs. State of U.P. (2026) 39 Centax 353 (All.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Vikas Budhwar, J.
- Ms Pooja Talwar, for the Petitioner.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, being the legal heir of a deceased sole proprietor, challenged the initiation and adjudication of proceedings under Section 73 of the CGST Act and the Uttar Pradesh GST Act against the deceased proprietor. The sole proprietor had died and thereafter an application for cancellation of GST registration was filed, pursuant to which the registration was cancelled. Despite the death of the proprietor and cancellation of registration, the department issued a show cause notice under Section 73 in the name of the deceased and subsequently passed an order determining demand against the proprietorship. The legal heir filed an appeal stating that knowledge of the order was received later, however the appellate authority rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that initiation and conclusion of proceedings for determination of tax liability against a deceased person was legally unsustainable. It observed that Section 93 of the CGST Act specifically governed the liability of legal representatives after the death of a taxable person and required that proceedings must be undertaken against the legal representative in accordance with law. The Court noted that the statute did not authorise the determination of liability against a deceased person and that the entire action of the department had been directed against the deceased proprietor. In these circumstances, the Court held that rejection of the appeal on the ground of limitation ignored the fundamental illegality in the proceedings and accordingly set aside the impugned orders while granting liberty to the department to proceed in accordance with law.
List of Cases Cited
- Amit Kumar Sethia v. State of U.P. — (2025) 29 Centax 182 (All.) — Followed [Paras 6, 10]
