LATE SHRI DILIPKUMAR TULSIDAS THROUGH L/H DHARINI DILIPKUMAR SHAH,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 3(3), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 897/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 December 2025AY 2013-144 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's claim that the assessment was made in the name of a deceased person, who expired on 17.08.2013, appeared correct and was conceded by the Ld. DR. The CIT(A)/NFAC had also recorded this fact but passed the order in the name of the deceased person and referred the case back to the AO. The Tribunal found it appropriate to set aside the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter to his file. The CIT(A)/NFAC is directed to verify the assessee's claim regarding the demise of the assessee and decide the case on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee (through his legal heir). The assessee is directed to appear without seeking adjournments unless for sufficient cause. The solitary ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Late Shri Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah, filed a return for AY 2013-14 declaring Rs.37,89,771/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case under Section 147, issuing notices under Section 148 and 142(1). The assessee failed to comply. The AO completed the assessment ex-parte under Section 144, making an addition of Rs.1,69,55,558/- as unexplained investment under Section 69, assessing total income at Rs.2,07,45,329/-. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A)/NFAC, who set aside the assessment and referred it back to the AO. The assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. The assessee's legal heir stated that the assessee expired on 17.08.2013, and the assessment was made in the name of a deceased person despite the department being informed.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment order passed in the name of a deceased person is void-ab-initio and needs to be quashed, as argued by the assessee. The assessee contended that the assessment order was issued in the name of a deceased person, who had expired on 17.08.2013, and the department was informed of this fact. Therefore, the order is void-ab-initio and should be quashed. The revenue did not record any specific arguments in this regard, but the Ld. DR conceded the assessee's claim regarding the deceased status of the assessee. 2. Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC erred in setting aside the assessment order and referring it back to the AO for further scrutiny, as argued by the assessee. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) should have quashed the order as it was passed against a deceased person. The CIT(A) had set aside the assessment and referred it back to the AO for fresh assessment under the Finance Act, 2024.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM :

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.02.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)/NFAC"] pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2013-14. 2. The matter was called for hearing on 28.07.2025, 29.09.2025 and 09.12.2025. None appeared for and/or on behalf of the assessee on any of the above date(s) of hearing. However, the Ld. DR was present on all these dates. Under these circumstances, we deem it fit to proceed to decide the appeal with the assistance of Ld. DR and the material available on record.

3.

Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2013-14 on 30.09.2023 declaring a total income of Rs.37,89,771/-. As per the information available with the Department, it was found that the assessee had jointly purchased immovable property worth Rs.7,00,00,000/-. The case of the assessee was therefore reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act") by issue of notice u/s 148 on 30.03.2021 and notice u/s 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee electronically through ITBA on 17.12.2021 and 11.03.2022. The assessee was also served with notice u/s 142(1) on 28.06.2021 requiring the assessee to file return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee, however, failed to comply with any of the notice issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer ("AO"). He, therefore, completed the assessment ex-parte u/s 144 based on the material available on record. The Ld. AO observed that the assessee has made investment in immovable property to the tune of Rs.1,69,55,558/- which are not recorded in the books of account and the assessee has offered no explanation about the nature and source of the investment. He therefore completed the assessment by making an addition of Rs.1,69,55,558/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act to the income of Rs.37,89,771/- returned by the assessee and assessed the income at Rs.2,07,45,329/- vide his order dated 29.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

4.

Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. As the assessment was made ex-parte qua the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC set aside the assessment made u/s 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act and referred the case back to the Ld. AO for making a fresh assessment within the time limit set by the Finance Act, 2024. 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following solitary ground of appeal : "Ground No. 1

1.

1 On the facts and Circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in setting aside the order of Assessment u/s 251 of the Income Tax Act and referring it back to Assessing Officer for further scrutiny without appreciating the fact that the said Assessment order is issued in the name of Deceased person and hence it is void-ab- initio, therefore needs to be quashed.

1.

2 The appellant therefore prays that the said Assessment order issued in the name of deceased person may please be quashed. Ground No. 2

2.

1 The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal herein and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal members to decide these according to the law. The Grounds stated above are independent of, and without prejudice to one another."

6.

We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. As per the statement of facts filed along with appeal memo, the assessee, Late Shri Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah expired on 17.08.2013. It is mentioned that the assessment has been made in the name of a deceased person by the Ld. AO inspite of the fact that the assessee had informed the Department about the demise of the assessee vide letter dated 12.04.2017. We find that the assessee has duly mentioned this fact even in the statement of facts in From No. 35 filed before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has recorded the same on page 2 of his impugned order, however, the impugned order is also passed in the name of a deceased person wherein the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC by invoking the newly inserted provisions by the Finance Act, 2024 has set aside the assessment order and referred the case back to the Ld. AO for making a fresh assessment without himself dwelling into the merits of the case. From the perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we find the assessee's claim appears to be correct. The Ld. DR conceded the same. Under these circumstances, we deem it fit to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to his file for verification of the above claim of the assessee and decide the case on merits as per fact and law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee (through his legal heir) once taken on record of the Department shall appear and make submissions before the Ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, unless required for the sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The solitary ground raised by the assessee is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th December, 2025. (R.K. Panda) VICE PRESIDENT (Astha Chandra) JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनांक / Dated : 19th December, 2025. रवि आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित /

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →