TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1919
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CIT/NFAC on 08-06-2023, without arraying the Appellants as parties to the Appeal, and hence the order passed against a dead person is not valid in eye of law. 2. That the Legatees under the Will dated 08-09-2017 executed by the deceased Assessee, had brought to the notice of the ITO, Ward-2(3)(5) about the death of the Assessee, and they also produced the Death Certificate and the Will requesting to implead them in the assessment proceeding by giving them an opportunity, in view of the fact that they had no knowledge about pendency of the Appeal before the CIT/NFAC which had been filed by the deceased assessee. In view of the same, the ITO, Ward-2(3)(5) who was aware of the pendency of the Appeal, ought to have taken necessary steps in the matter. 3. That a dead individual is not a person in the eye of law and hence the assessment or reassessment proceedings or subsequent proceeding taken in his name is invalid. The Department must bring the legal representatives on record and continue the proceedings against them as required under and in accordance with Section 159 of the Act. In the instant case, the assessee died without marriage after executing the Will and during pend....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: A. the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, while passing order in W.P.(C) 12215/2021 had referred to its own Judgment passed in case of Savita Kapila Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, in W.P.(C) no.3258/2020, wherein it is held that : "26. In the opinion of this court the issuance of a notice under section 148 of the Act is the foundation for reopening of an assessment. Consequently, the sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction to reopen an assessment is that such notice should be issued in the name of the correct person. This requirement of issuing notice to a correct person and not to a dead person is not merely a procedural requirement but is a condition precedent to the impugned notice being valid in law." In the present case, though the notice under Sec.148(2) had been issued to the assessee and the Assessment order was passed during his lifetime, however, after filing of the Appeal before the CIT, the assessee died during its pendency. The fact about the death of the assessee was brought to the notice of the ITO, Ward- 2(3)(5) since they had no knowledge about pendency of the Appeal before CIT/NFAC. Hence, the ITO, Ward-2(3)(5) who was a party to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he email address given in Form 35. 5. On receipt of letter by banker of assessee from ld. AO about payment of taxes, on 18.6.2019 the L/R attended and submitted before the ld. AO about the death of assessee and requested for impleading and opportunity to represent him in the assessment proceedings. However, no opportunities were given. 6. Meanwhile The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 8.6.2023 dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution and also confirmed the action of the AO in absence of any submission made by the assessee. 7. The order of the ld. CIT(A) was taken by the L/R in the 2nd week of July, 2023 to his CA. After understanding the issue involved in the appeal, the relevant documents were also given to the CA in Aug. 2023. Somewhere in the month of August, 2023, the present Advocate was contacted for filing of the appeal. At that time LR was informed that a certificate of L/R from the court is required to be obtained and only thereafter appeal can be filed before the Tribunal. It was intimated that the petition is already filed before the City Civil Court and Sessions Judge for succession certificate which is pending adjudication. Such succession certificate was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at LR of the assessee was constantly vigilant about the proceedings, appraised the authorities about the death of the assessee and also the willingness to implead him in the proceedings. Though he went to the ld. AO and requested so, obviously no intimation was available with the ld. CIT (A), as it was faceless. In fact, ld. AO should have intimated the death of the assessee to ld. CIT (A), as soon as he came to know about it. For filing appeal before ITAT, delay was explained as no succession certificate was available to LR till September 2024 and then there were health issues, which prevented LR from filing the appeal. Looking at the causes stated above, the assessee acted in a bonafide manner, and the delay was due to circumstances beyond the control of LR. Thus, I find that there is sufficient cause in not filing the appeal in time. Accordingly, I condone the delay and admit the appeal. 13. The brief facts of the case show that assessee was an individual, filed his return of income on 23.2.2016 at a total income of Rs. 15,04,280. The return was picked up for scrutiny. The assessment order came to be passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act whereby total income was assessed to Rs. 40,02,3....