BHARAT KUMAR VELUSAMY,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KARUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2056/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 December 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing appeals, accepting the legal heir's claim. It found a violation of natural justice as the Ld.CIT(A) orders were passed after the assessee's death without hearing the legal heir. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the appeals back to the Ld.CIT(A) to hear the legal heir and pass fresh speaking orders according to law.

What were the facts?

The legal heir of the deceased assessee filed delayed appeals against Ld.CIT(A) orders for AY 2012-13 and 2013-14. The assessee had passed away on 13.06.2023, while the Ld.CIT(A) orders were subsequently passed on 30.09.2024, allegedly without the legal heir's knowledge or hearing. The original assessment orders were passed under Section 143(3)/147.

What were the issues?

1. Condonation of delay in filing appeals by the legal heir. 2. Whether Ld.CIT(A) orders passed after the assessee's death without hearing the legal heir constituted a violation of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 06.11.2025Pronounced: 04.12.2025

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are appeals preferred by the legal heir of assessee [Shri K.

1.

Velusamy] against the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Chennai-18, both dated 30.09.2024 for the Assessment Years (hereinafter referred to as "AY”) 2012-13 & 2013-14.

& 2056/Chny/2025 (AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14) Bharat Kumar Velusamy :: 2 ::

2.

At the outset, it is noted that the appeals have been filed belatedly by ‘237’ days. The legal heir representing the late assessee pleads for condoning the delay on the ground that he was not aware of the impugned orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) dated 30.09.2024 since his father Shri K. Velusamy (assessee) while he was alive didn’t disclose about the assessment proceedings/appellate proceedings going on against him. And while the First Appellate proceedings was going on, the assessee passed away on 13.06.2023 (copy of death certificate filed before us); and thus, asserted before us that the legal heir was totally in the dark about the existence of the impugned order. Considering the aforesaid facts, which couldn’t be controverted, we condone the delay and proceed to hear the grounds of appeal raised by the legal heir of the assessee against the action of the Ld.CIT(A).

3. At the outset, Ld.AR of the assessee pointed out that the AO had passed the assessment order on 16.12.2019 for AY 2012-13 and had passed the assessment order for AY 2013-14 on 17.12.2019 u/s.143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act”) and the assessee had filed the appeals before the Ld.CIT(A)- 18; and when the appellate proceedings were going on, the assessee passed away on 13.06.2023 [which fact is corroborated by the Death Certificate issued by the Department of the Revenue Administrative, Government of Tamil Nadu]. Therefore, the Ld.AR brought to our notice & 2056/Chny/2025 (AYs 2012-13 & 2013-14) Bharat Kumar Velusamy that the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A) dated 30.09.2024 was without hearing the assessee. The said assertion made by the Ld.AR needs to be believed, since he passed away way back on 13.06.2023, whereas the impugned order was passed on 30.09.2024. In such a scenario, since there is a violation of natural justice, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeals back to his file with a direction to hear the legal heir and pass speaking order on the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee as mandated in sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act. The legal-heir of assessee is directed to file relevant documents to substantiate the claim made in the grounds of appeal, without fail and the Ld.CIT(A) to pass order in accordance to law after hearing the legal heir/assessee.

4.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →