Is my proof correct?
Proof: Let $\varepsilon>0$ and consider only refinement of the partition $$P_0=\{ a,c-\frac{\varepsilon}{4},c+\frac{\varepsilon}{4},b \}.$$ This way, $$ U(f,P)=\left[c+\frac{\varepsilon}{4}-\left(c-\frac{\varepsilon}{4}\right)\right]=\frac{\varepsilon}{2}<\varepsilon $$ $$ L(f,P)=0. $$ Thus, for all $\varepsilon>0$ $$ U(f,P)=U(f,P)-L(f,P)<\varepsilon $$ $$ \implies U(f,P)=L(f,P)=0. $$ By definition, $ \underline{\int_{a}^{b}}f\le\overline{\int_{a}^{b}}f $. On the other hand $$ \overline{\int_{a}^{b}}f=\inf\limits_{P}\{U(f,P)\}\le U(f,P)=L(f,P)\le \sup\limits_{P}\{L(f,P)\}=\underline{\int_{a}^{b}}f $$ $$ \implies \underline{\int_{a}^{b}}f\ge\overline{\int_{a}^{b}}f $$ Therefore, $f$ is integrable.
Since for all partitions we have $ L(f,P)=0 $, $$ \sup\limits_{P}\{L(f,P)\}=\underline{\int_{a}^{b}}f=\int_{a}^{b}f=0. $$
No, it is not correct. What you proved was that for each $\varepsilon>0$ there is a partition $P\varepsilon$ (you called it $P$ but I want to stress that it depends on $\varepsilon$) such that $L(f,P\varepsilon)=0$ and that $U(f,P\varepsilon)<\varepsilon$. So, yes, $U(f,P\varepsilon)-L(f,P\varepsilon)<\varepsilon$, but $U(f,P\varepsilon)$ is still greater than $0$; you cannot say that $U(f,P\varepsilon)-L(f,P\varepsilon)=0$.
However, it follows from what you did that$$(\forall\varepsilon>0):\overline{\int_a^b}f(x)\,\mathrm dx-\underline{\int_a^b}f(x)\,\mathrm dx<\varepsilon$$and therefore, yes$$\int_a^bf(x)\,\mathrm dx=0.$$