The Court held that initiating fresh proceedings in the name of a person known to be deceased was without jurisdiction, even though the legal heir had participated in earlier rounds.
The Gujarat High Court has quashed an intimation, show-cause notice, and final demand order issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act against a sole proprietor who had passed away more than five years earlier, holding that the respondent authority lacked jurisdiction to proceed against a deceased person [Dipakkumar Nathalal Raichura v. State of Gujarat & Ors.].
The bench of Justices A.S. Supehia and Vaibhavi D. Nanavati noted that the sole proprietor, Nathalal Keshavbhai Raichura, had passed away on 21.04.2020. His son, the petitioner, had filed an application for cancellation of registration in December 2021, attaching the death certificate. The registration was ultimately cancelled with retrospective effect from 31.12.2021, and the final return in GSTR-10 was duly filed.
Despite this, the respondent authority had issued a fresh intimation under Form DRC-01A on 23.06.2025 and a show-cause notice on 27.06.2025 — again in the name of the deceased — alleging wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit. This was done even though the authority was already aware that an appeal from an earlier round of proceedings had been filed by the petitioner as a legal heir.
Quashing the proceedings, the Court reserved liberty in favour of the respondent to initiate fresh proceedings against the legal heir, as permissible under law, without expressing any opinion on the merits.
2026-juristway.com-3071-HC(Gujarat)-GST
