DCIT, MUMBAI vs. LATA MAHIPATRAY SHAH, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that an appeal filed against a deceased person is not maintainable. Since the legal heir was not impleaded despite opportunities, the appeal was dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against a deceased assessee. The assessee had passed away before the appeal was instituted. The Department was directed to bring the legal heir on record but failed to do so.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the maintainability of an appeal filed against a deceased individual. The secondary issue concerned the validity of the assessment proceedings initiated against a deceased person without impleading legal heirs.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT BEENA PILLAI & SHRI JAGADISH
Per: SHRI JAGADISH, A.M.:
The present appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, under section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessment in the present case was completed under section 153C read with section 144 of the Act vide order dated 29.09.2021.
The Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs.30,55,60,743 made under section 68 of the Act on account of alleged bogus long-term capital gains and the consequential addition of Rs.91,31,212 made under section 69C of the Act. The respondent- assessee has also filed the captioned Cross Objection raising various legal grounds against the validity of the assessment.
During the course of hearing, it was brought to our notice that the respondent-assessee, Smt. Lata Mahipatray Shah, had expired on 18.12.2018, whereas the Revenue has instituted the present appeal against the deceased person. The record further shows that, on 10.02.2026, the Department was specifically directed to bring the legal heir of the deceased respondent on record and to file a revised Form No. 36. However, the legal heir has not been brought on record and the appeal continues to remain instituted against the deceased respondent.
An appeal filed against a person who was not alive on the date of its institution cannot be maintained against such deceased person. In the absence of the legal representative having been impleaded despite opportunity, the present appeal is not maintainable. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue as not maintainable. However,
ITA No.3041 & CO No.135/M/2025 Lata Mahipatray Shah
liberty is granted to the Revenue to file a fresh appeal against the legal heir/legal representative of the deceased assessee, if so advised, in accordance with law. All rights and contentions of the parties, including on the question of limitation, are kept open.
The Cross Objection filed by the assessee arises out of the aforesaid appeal of the Revenue. Since the Revenue’s appeal itself has been dismissed as not maintainable, the Cross Objection has no independent locus and does not survive for adjudication. Accordingly, the Cross Objection is also dismissed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee are dismissed in the terms indicated above.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04/09/2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (BEENA PILLAI) (JAGADISH) Judicial Member Accountant Member
Mumbai, Dated: 04/09/2026 Ashwani Rao Sr. Private Secretary
ITA No.3041 & CO No.135/M/2025 Lata Mahipatray Shah
Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT (Appeals) 5. The DR, I.T.A.T. By order
(Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026