PANKAJ SETHI L/H BRIJ MOHAN SETHI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9006/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 March 2026AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appellant, Mr. Pankaj Sethi, had not provided any material to establish his status as a legal representative of the deceased assessee, Late Sh. Brij Mohan Sethi. Specifically, there was no indication that he had succeeded to the estate, was managing it, or was acting as an intermeddler, as required by the definition of a "legal representative" under section 2(29) of the Act read with section 2(11) of the CPC. Additionally, the department had not initiated any proceedings against the appellant under section 159 of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's claim to maintain the appeal in his capacity as a legal representative at this stage. The appeal was rejected as premature. However, the appellant was granted liberty to file a fresh appeal once he satisfied the statutory conditions of a "legal representative" or if the department proceeded against him under section 159 of the Act, whichever occurred earlier.

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by Mr. Pankaj Sethi, claiming to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee, Late Sh. Brij Mohan Sethi, for the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal arises from the order dated 30.08.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, New Delhi, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The deceased assessee passed away on 19.10.2019. The appellant's submissions did not provide any indication that he had succeeded to the estate of the deceased, was managing it, or was acting as an intermeddler. Furthermore, there was no material on record to suggest that the department had initiated proceedings against the appellant under section 159 of the Act.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellant, Mr. Pankaj Sethi, qualifies as a "legal representative" of the deceased assessee, Late Sh. Brij Mohan Sethi, under section 2(29) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to maintain the present appeal. Assessee's Contention: The appellant claims to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee. (Implicitly argued by filing the appeal in this capacity). Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that there was no material on record to establish the appellant's status as a legal representative or that proceedings had been initiated against him under section 159 of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 2(29),Section 159,Section 2(11)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisa Maity, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.03.2026Pronounced: 11.03.2026

ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s order dated 30.08.2019 passed in case no. 10629/2016-17, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It next emerges with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the appellant herein Sh. Pankaj Sethi claims himself to be the legal representative of the assessee Late Sh. Brij Mohan Sethi, who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode on 19.10.2019. Faced with this situation, we note that there is not even an iota of indication in the appellant’s submissions that either he has succeeded to the estate of the deceased or he is managing the same or as an intermeddler thereof; as the case may be, as per section 2(29) of the Act r.w.s. 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 defining such a “legal representative” in very terms. There is further no material on record that the appellant herein has been proceeded against by the department under section 159 of the Act.

3.

That being the case, we find no merit in the appellant’s claim as legal representative of the deceased assessee and reject his instant appeal at this stage in very terms, subject to a rider that he shall be at liberty to file a fresh appeal as and when he either satisfies the statutory conditions of a “legal representative” under section 2(11) (supra) or he is proceeded against by the department under section 159 of the Act, whichever is earlier. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 2(29)

All 77 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(29) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →