LATE MUKH RAM YADAV THROUGH LEGAL HERI SHANTI DEVI,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-4(2), LUCKNOW

ITA 49/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 October 2026AY 2017-184 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal could not proceed because the sole legal heir who had filed the appeal before the Tribunal had also expired. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution and for failure to bring the appropriate legal heir(s) on record as per law. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's representative expressed an inability to make submissions on this procedural issue. The Tribunal explicitly kept all substantive issues, including the validity of assessment proceedings and additions made, undecided. A liberty was granted to any legal heir(s) to seek restoration of the appeal in accordance with law. The registry was directed to place the matter before the Bench if such an application for restoration is filed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Late Mukh Ram Yadav, is the subject of this appeal. The assessment year is 2017-18. The appeal is filed by the legal heir, Shanti Devi, against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, dated 26.12.2023. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 21,73,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 24,23,500/- during the demonetization period. The assessee's total income was assessed at Rs. 28,13,930/- by order dated 26.12.2019. The CIT(A) sustained the addition. Crucially, the assessee expired on 25.06.2019, before the AO's assessment order was passed on 26.12.2019. The appeal before the Tribunal was filed with a delay of 691 days. It was further noted that the sole legal heir who filed the appeal before the Tribunal has also expired.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the CIT(A) is illegal and against the law and natural justice due to non-service of notice by post and lack of proper personal hearing, as argued by the assessee's legal heir. 2. Whether the addition of Rs. 21,73,500/- made by the AO on account of cash deposits during the demonetization period is valid, when the assessee claimed the cash was received from the sale of agricultural land, and whether the assessee was denied a proper personal hearing before the AO, as argued by the assessee's legal heir. 3. Whether the appeal can proceed, given that the sole legal heir who filed the appeal before the Tribunal has also expired, and no appropriate legal heir has been brought on record, as raised by the Tribunal and acknowledged by the Revenue. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee's legal heir argued that notices from the CIT(A) were only electronic and not served by post, preventing the filing of a reply. The AO's addition was based on cash deposits during demonetization, which the assessee claimed was from agricultural land sales. The assessee was denied a proper personal hearing before both the AO and CIT(A), rendering the orders illegal and against natural justice. The assessee sought an opportunity for a personal hearing and allowance of the appeal. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through the CIT-DR, expressed inability to offer submissions regarding the substitution of the deceased legal heir.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ‘एकल’ न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW श्री कुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष के समछ BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.49/LKW/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Late Mukh Ram Yadav v. The Income Tax Officer- through legal heir Shanti Devi 4(2) House No.183, Rahimabad Aayakar Bhawan, 5, Anshik, Bijnor, Lucknow, Uttar Ashok Marg, Lucknow- Pradesh-226002. 226001. PAN:ACHPY8208R अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant by: None present for the assessee प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent by: Shri Sudhakar Shukla, CIT- DR सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date of hearing: 19 10 2026 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date of 28 10 2026 pronouncement: O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, filed by the legal heir of the deceased assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.12.2023 pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1- That the appellant legal heir Shanti Devi W/o Late Mukh Ram Yadav, aged about 74 approximately. the appellant has fully depended upon the Ld. Counsel.

ITA No.49/LKW/2026 Page 2 of 4 2- That the CIT(A), Income Tax Department were issued electronically notices through the ITBA to the appellant but not served any notice to the appellant by post. Hence, the Ld. counsel could not be filed any reply or written submission or case related documents before the CIT(A) hence, passed order illegal and against the law and natural justice. 3- That the Ld. Assessing Officer has addition Rs.24,23,500.00, due to deposit Cash in during the demonetization period i.e. (i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016), but the appellant cash received towards sale of Agriculture Land. The Ld. Assessing Officer has totally assessed Income Rs. 28,12,930.00 as per the point no-4 of the Assessment order. The appellant has not availed proper personal hearing of case. Hence, passed order is liable to quash/set-side/ amend. 4- That the order u/s 250 under the Income Tax Act, 1961, dismissed hence, order passed is illegal and against the law and natural justice. 5- That the, due to the above-mentioned reason, the appellant did not avail a proper personal hearing of the case; hence, the order passed is against the law and natural justice. 6- That the order passed against the facts and law and natural justice therefore order passed is liable to amend /quash/set aside. 7- That the appellant craves leave to add/ amend/ alter/modify/delete any grounds of appeal till the hearing of the case. PRAYER Therefore, it is requested kindly considered the fact and grounds of appeal as above mentioned and order u/s 250 under Income Tax Act, 1961, passed order against natural justices hence, may very kindly be provide to us opportunity of personal hearing of case and accept & allow the version of appeal. Any other relief of which this court may deem properly we also awarded.” 2. The facts in brief are that in this case, the Assessing Officer (“AO”, for short) noted that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.24,23,500/- in the bank accounts. However, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee before the Assessing Authority to explain the source of cash deposits. Therefore, the AO made an addition of Rs.21,73,500/- and assessed the total income of Rs.28,13,930/- vide order dated 26.12.2019. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the matter was carried in appeal before

ITA No.49/LKW/2026 Page 3 of 4 the Ld. CIT(A) who sustained the addition and dismissed the appeal vide order dated 26.12.2023.

It is pertinently to note that the assessee had expired on 25.06.2019, whereas the assessment order was passed on 26.12.2019. It is further noted that Form No.35 was filed in the name of the deceased assessee, although the verification was made by his wife. The Ld. CIT(A) also passed the order against the deceased person. Despite having recorded the factum of death of the assessee before me, the present appeal has been filed through legal heir with a delay of 691 days, for which an application seeking condonation of delay has been filed.

I have heard the Ld. Departmental Representative (“DR”, for short) and perused the material on record. It is brought to my notice that the sole legal heir of the deceased assessee has also expired. Hence, the present appeal cannot proceed unless the appropriate legal heir(s) are brought on record in accordance with law. The Ld. DR has expressed inability to offer any submission in this regard.

Under this circumstance, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution and for failure to bring the legal heir on record. However, a liberty is granted to the legal heir(s), if any, to seek restoration of the present appeal in accordance with law.

Since the appeal is being disposed of on the aforesaid preliminary ground, all the issues, including the validity of the assessment proceedings and the additions made therein, are kept open and are not adjudicated upon. The registry is directed to place the matter before the Bench if any application for restoration is filed by the legal heir(s), in accordance with law.

ITA No.49/LKW/2026 Page 4 of 4 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/10/2026.

Sd/- [कुल भारत] [KUL BHARAT] उपाध्यक्ष/VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 28/10/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT Digitally signed by VIJAY PAL 4. DR VIJAY PAL SINGH 5. Guard File SINGH Date: 2026.10.28 16:40:49 +05'30' By Order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →