D JOTHIAMMAL REPRESENTED BY L/H N DHANAVEL,CUDDALORE vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 84/CHNY/2020Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 November 2021AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal quashed the orders of the CIT(A) as they were passed on a deceased person. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) to implead the legal heirs and decide the matters on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed with a delay of 55 days. The CIT(A) had passed orders after the assessee's demise without impleading the legal heirs.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) orders are valid when passed after the assessee's death without impleading legal heirs, and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ (SMC

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

Hearing: 08.11.2021Pronounced: 08.11.2021

आदेश /O R D E R These four appeals by the assessee are arising out of 1. separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in 197/18-19, 198/18-19 & 199/18-19, all orders dated 30.08.2019. The Assessments were framed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 2 (1), Chennai, for the assessment years to 87/Chny/2020 2 2012-13, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 vide all orders dated 21.12.2018 U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that none present for assessee, when these appeals were called for hearing. However, going through the factual situation, I decided to decide these appeals after hearing ld. senior Department Representative.

3.

I have noticed that these appeals filed by the assessee are delayed / time barred by 55 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition stating the common reasons and the relevant reason mentioned reads as under:- “The petition is a sick heart patient and he has been admitted in the hospital and he has been suffering from personal issues including grieving of his wife Mrs. Jothiammal. Hence the petitioner prays that there is a genuine delay in filing FORM 36 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai which may kindly be condoned and the case be decided on its merits.

1.

When these reasons were confronted to ld. senior Department Representative, he only contested that the assessee is seeking condonation for 44 days except this, he could not controvert to 87/Chny/2020 3 the factual situation. I noticed that the order of CIT(A) is served to assessee on 20.09.2019 and the date of payment of fee is 06.01.2020 i.e., Tribunal fee. The assessee has filed these appeals on 13.01.2020. Admittedly, there is a delay of 55 days. On going by the reasons that the assessee is a heart patient and has been hospitalized and he has been suffering from personal issues like death of his wife Mrs. Jothiammal, I have noticed one unique fact in the orders of CIT(A) that CIT(A) was aware about the fact that the assessee is no more. The relevant noting is by CIT(A), wherein he has reproduced the written submissions of the assessee at Para 5, Page 3 and the relevant line reads as under:- “5. …………. ……………… The only submissions filed by the Authorized Representative, unfortunately after the demise of the appellant are as follows:”

It means that the CIT(A) has passed the orders on a dead person, but this is a curable defect. The CIT(A) could have impleaded the legal heirs and appellate orders should have been passed on legal heirs because the assessments were made in the correct name i.e., name of the assessee Smt. Jothiammal. Hence due to this reason, I quash these to 87/Chny/2020 4 orders, after confronting with ld. senior DR and restore these appeals back to the file of the CIT(A), who will first implead legal heirs and then decide the appeals after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the legal heirs and decide the issues on merits.

4.

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 8th November, 2021 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →