TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 650
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inst the deceased person despite the fact that the assessee had already expired on 21st February, 2017. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that since the assessee has raised a legal issue regarding the maintainability of the appeal, therefore, the preliminary objection raised by the assessee be taken up first prior to the adjudication of the appeal of the revenue. Since the preliminary objection raised by the assessee is legal in nature and goes to the root of the matter being the maintainability of the appeal, therefore, we propose to first hear and dispose off the preliminary objection. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that during the pendency of the appeal before the ld. CIT (A), the assessee expired on 21s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h High Court in case of CIT vs. Santosh Rani, 219 ITR 301 (MP) as well as judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in case of CWT vs. V.S. Meenakshi Achi, 205 ITR 260 (Madras). Thus the ld. Counsel has submitted that in identical facts the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the decision of the Tribunal dismissing the appeal filed by the revenue against the deceased assessee. Similarly, the Hon'ble Madras High Court has also held that the appeal filed by the revenue against the deceased assessee is not maintainable and, therefore, the provisions of section 292 of the IT Act cannot be pressed into service. He has also referred to Rule 9A, 12 and 26 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 and submitted that as per Rule 9A, revised form no. 36 can be fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the limitation provided under section 253(3) of the Act may be condoned as the same is not intentional or deliberate but due to the fact that at the time of filing the original form no. 36 there was an inadvertent mistake which was then rectified by filing the revised form no. 36 on 26th July, 2018. Thus the ld. D/R has submitted that the revenue has taken the corrective steps immediately after realizing the fact that the assessee had already expired on 21st February, 2017 and filed the amended form no. 36 which was duly taken on record. 4. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee late Shri Chandi Ram had expired on 21st February, 2017 during the pendency....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e deceased assessee by legal heir, therefore, the revised form no. 36 filed by the department on 26th July, 2018 is as per the leave granted by the Tribunal for bringing the legal heir on record. There is no quarrel on the point that the appeal filed against the deceased assessee is not maintainable, however, the said invalid appeal filed by the revenue will not forfeit the right to file a fresh appeal against the legal heir subject to the leave of the court. In the case in hand, since the revenue was allowed to take the necessary steps, therefore, the delay in filing the Memorandum of Appeal against the legal heir of the deceased assessee has been found to be explained by the revenue due to inadvertent mistake and, therefore, even if the s....