LATE RAGHVENDRA JAISWAL THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SMT. MANJU JAISWAL,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(3), KANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 338/LKW/2018Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 September 2021AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that an order passed by the CIT(A) on a deceased person is null and void. The tribunal quashed the CIT(A)'s order and directed it to pass a fresh order after bringing the legal heirs on record and providing them an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee passed away during the pendency of the appeal before the CIT(A). Despite this fact being noted by the CIT(A), the appeal was decided on merits against the deceased assessee. The assessee's legal heir then filed an appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether an appellate order passed by the CIT(A) on a deceased assessee is valid in law. The necessity of impleading legal heirs in appeal proceedings after the death of an assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI T.S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, DR
Hearing: 26/08/2021Pronounced: 27/09/2021

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 24.01.2018.The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “(A) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the assessing officer for the assessment under consideration, as correct. (B) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) while upholding the action of the assessing officer as correct completely ignored the facts of the case that the Appellant, i.e. Raghvcndra Jaiswal expired on 21-04- 2017 during the pendency of the appeal (after filing of appeal). (C) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (appeal) has erred on facts and in law as the appellate order has been passed on the late Appellant. (D) That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) has erred on facts and in law upholding that the Appellant being the assessee has not been serious in perusing the appeal at hand. However, on opining the above mentioned, the Ld. Commissioner missed the fact that the Appellant expired on 21-04-2017 and due to uncertainty of the same, could not make any further request of bringing any legal heir on record. The reasoning that the assessee was not serious is arbitrary and bad in law.. (E) That the order dated 24/01/2018 dismissing the appeal and confirming the order of the I.T.O-Ward-4(3) Kanpur is bad in law, arbitrary, illegal and is liable to be quashed. (F) That the Appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify, add, delete, substitute, and or any of the ground of appeal on or before the final hearing, if necessity so arises.”

2.

The ld. AR at the outset submitted that the assessee after filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) had expired on 21.04.2017 and in this respect our attention was invited to the order of ld. CIT(A) wherein the ld. CIT(A) himself has noted this fact. It was submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on a dead person is a null and void and therefore the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) be quashed and the Department be directed to take on record the legal heirs of the assessee and should be given opportunity of being heard.

3.

The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 4. I have heard the parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find that this appeal was earlier dismissed for non prosecution vide order of the Tribunal dated 22.02.2019. However, the same order was recalled for hearing on merits, vide Tribunal order dated 14.06.2019. I find that the assessee in whose name ld. CIT(A) has passed the order is dead person who expired on 21.04.2017 the fact of which has been noted by the ld. CIT(A) himself in his order. Even knowing about the fact of having assessee been dead the ld. CIT(A) passed the order, dismissing the appeal of the assessee which is not as per the law. The ld. CIT(A) should have brought on record the legal heirs of the assessee and after giving opportunity to the legal heirs should have passed the orders on merits. In view of fact that ld. CIT(A) has passed his order on a dead person therefore such order is a not a valid order therefore I quash the order of ld. CIT(A) and direct him to pass a fresh order in the name of legal heir of the assessee after giving opportunity of being heard. The legal heirs of the assessee are also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before ld. CIT(A) and should submit their submissions before him. 5. In view of above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 27/09/2021)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →