Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Sama Ramachandra Reddy, had died prior to the appeals being heard. Despite directions from the Tribunal to bring the legal representatives on record, no steps were taken by the assessee's side. Furthermore, the Authorised Representative also withdrew their Power of Attorney.
Held
The Tribunal held that since the legal representatives of the deceased assessee failed to come on record and comply with Rule 26 of ITAT Rules, 1963 and Order 22 Rule 3 of CPC, the appeals stood abated and were accordingly dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals could be continued in the absence of the deceased assessee's legal representatives being brought on record, and if such appeals stood abated due to non-compliance with procedural rules.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
ORDER
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :
These two appeals by the assessee are directed against two separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), both dated 01.06.2017 for the A.Y. 2002-03 and 2008-09 respectively.
None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when these appeals were called for hearing. It transpires from the record that the assessee had already expired long back and this fact was brought to the notice of the Tribunal at the time of hearing on 10.03.2025.
Accordingly, the Tribunal vide order dated 10.03.2025 directed the parties to bring the legal heir / representative of the deceased- assessee on record by filing the application within the time. For ready reference the order sheet dated 10.03.2025 is reproduced as under :
Despite the directions of the Tribunal, no steps were taken on behalf of the assessee to bring the Legal Representatives (“LRs”) heirs on record to substitute the deceased-assessee for prosecution of the appeals. Several adjournments were granted awaiting steps to be taken by the assessee for bringing the LRs of the deceased- assessee on record. Thereafter, the Authorised Representative of the assessee filed an application seeking permission for withdrawal of its authorisation / power of attorney on 16.07.2025 which reads as under :
Therefore by considering the facts that these appeals are old matters pending for last more than seven years, the Tribunal issued notices to the assessee / LRs of the deceased-assessee so that the necessary steps to be taken for bringing the legal heirs on record and argued the appeals. It was also made clear that no adjournment shall be granted on the ground of withdrawal of power of attorney or change of counsel. Thus the hearing of the appeals were adjourned to 21.08.2025 in the category of old appeals. On 21.08.2025, the Tribunal further noted that the notice was issued to the assessee / LR was received back unserved with the postal remarks that the addressee is not found at the given address and current address is not known. Though the Assessing Officer in the appeals filed by the department for the A.Y. 2007-08, filed the amended Form 36 by substituting the deceased-assessee with the LRs. Again notice was issued to the legal representative and hearing was adjourned to 15.07.2025 and thereafter on 16.07.2025. Despite sufficient opportunities given to the assessee / legal representative of the deceased-assessee, nobody has appeared and even the AR also stopped appearing on behalf of the deceased-assessee after filing the letter dated 16.07.2025, seeking permission to withdraw the power of attorney.
The Learned Departmental Representative has submitted that the appeals of the assessee are liable to be dismissed being abated once the assessee has already expired and the LRs have not taken any steps to substitute the deceased-assessee.
We have considered the facts emerging from record ;that the assessee had expired long back as reported by the AR of the assessee and noted by the Tribunal vide order sheet dated 30.03.2025.
However, despite various opportunities and notices issued to the assessee / legal representative, no steps have been taken for bringing the legal representatives on record and filing of revised Form No.36 as required under Rule 26 of ITAT Rules, 1963 which read as under :
“ 26. Continuation of proceedings after the death or adjudication of a party to the appeal:- Where an assesses whether he be the appellant or the respondent to an appeal dies or is adjudicated insolvent or in the case of a company is being wound-up, the appeal shall not abate and may, if the assessee was the appellant, be continued by, and if he was the respondent be continued against, the executor, administrator or other legal representative of the assessee or by or against the assignee, receiver or liquidator, as the case may be. Provided that : (i) The assessee files a revised Form No.36 duly filled up giving revised name of the party duly verified in the same manner as required by rule 47 of Income-tax Rules, 1962. (ii) The revised Form No.36 shall specify the appeal number as originally assigned or, in the event of non-availability of such number on the date of filing the appeal shall be mentioned in the covering letter to enable the Registrar to place fresh Form No.36 in the original file.”
6.1 Even otherwise, order 22 Rule 3 of CPC, 1908 provides that on the death of the sole plaintiff, the legal representative of the plaintiff to be made party and shall proceed with the case. However, where no application is made within the time limited provided by law, the suit shall abate so far as the deceased plaintiff is concerned.
Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances as discussed above, these two appeals filed by the assessee stand abated and accordingly dismissed.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed being abated.