Smt Naazma Begum vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Smt. Naazma Begum, is the widow of Mohd. Yunas, who passed away on 08.12.2023. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 20.08.2025 was issued in the name of the deceased, Mohd. Yunas, nearly two years after his death. The petitioner, in her reply dated 01.12.2025, brought this fact to the attention of the Adjudicating Authority. Despite this, the proceedings continued against the deceased, and an order dated 15.12.2025 was passed pursuant to the SCN. The petitioner challenged these actions before the High Court.

Held

The Court held that a Show Cause Notice issued to a person who had already died cannot sustain proceedings against the deceased. The Court reasoned that Section 93 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, does not dispense with the requirement of proceeding against the person upon whom liability may lawfully devolve. The issuance of a notice to a deceased individual renders the subsequent proceedings invalid. Consequently, the Court set aside the Show Cause Notice dated 20.08.2025 and the Order dated 15.12.2025. The Court clarified that this decision does not prevent the Respondents from initiating proceedings against the legal representative or any other permissible person in accordance with the CGST Act, leaving all such rights and contentions open.

Key Issues

1. Whether a Show Cause Notice issued to a deceased person, after their death, can sustain proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? This issue turns on the interpretation of Section 93 of the CGST Act and the general principles of procedural law regarding proceedings against deceased individuals. The Petitioner argued that a Show Cause Notice issued to a deceased person is a nullity and cannot form the basis for any further proceedings. They contended that the Adjudicating Authority failed to appreciate that the recipient of the notice was no longer alive and that the proceedings were therefore vitiated from the outset. The Petitioner relied on the principle that legal proceedings must be initiated against a living person or their legal representative. The Respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the validity of the SCN issued to a deceased person. However, their participation in the proceedings implies a defense of the Adjudicating Authority's actions.