DCIT, MUMBAI vs. LATA MAHIPATRAY SHAH, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3041/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 September 2026AY 2018-194 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

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?

Section 153C,Section 144,Section 68,Section 69C,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SMT BEENA PILLAI & SHRI JAGADISH

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar - CIT DR
Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 04.09.2026

Per: SHRI JAGADISH, A.M.:

1.

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.

2.

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.

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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.

6.

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

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →