PRABHA TRIPATHI L/R OF LATE RAGHAV RAM TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by two separate orders of first-appeal for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12 & 2012-13 dated 18.05.2023 & 14.07.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of respective assessment-orders dated 27.11.2018 & 06.12.2019 passed by learned ITO-2(4)/2(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 143(3) r.w.s.
Page 1 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”], the assessee has filed these appeals
on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Ld. AR at the outset submitted that the assessee in these cases was
“Raghav Ram Tripathi” who had deceased on 09.04.2021. Copy of death
certificate is placed on record. Therefore, wife of assessee “Smt. Prabha
Tripathi” has signed and verified Form No. 36 and pursuing these appeals
as “Legal Representative [L/R]”. Ld. AR pointed a crucial fact that the
assessee had died during pendency of first-appeal itself and there was no
information to CIT(A) qua death of assessee, hence the CIT(A) has passed
order in the name of deceased assessee without taking on record the L/R.
The Registry has informed that these appeals are delayed by 527 days
and 466 days respectively and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR submitted that
the L/R has filed applications for condonation of delays with her affidavits
on stamp papers. The affidavit filed in ITA No. 36/Ind/2025 of AY 2011-12 is
scanned and re-produced below for an immediate reference and similar
affidavit has been filed for ITA No. 37/Ind/2025 of AY 2012-13 except
change of certain dates:
Page 2 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
Page 3 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
Page 4 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
Referring to contents of above affidavit, particularly Para No. 4 and 6(b)
to 6(f), Ld. AR explained the averments made therein by L/R. He narrated
that the email id: rrtripathibhopal@gmail.com and phone number
9826489252 belonging to deceased assessee were given in Form No. 35 of
first-appeal filed to CIT(A) but after death of assessee, the mobile number
was de-activated and there was nobody in family to check the email a/c. The
L/R has further averred that she was not aware of first-appeals filed and
pending before CIT(A); that the impugned order passed by CIT(A) was not
received by post; that it is when the bank a/c of son Mr. Atul Triphati was
attached for non-payment of demand that the L/R filed an application dated
09.09.2024 to AO for stay over recovery of demand and even in that
Page 5 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
application, copy at Page No. 5 of Paper-Book, the L/R requested the AO to
grant stay “till disposal of first-appeal” which clearly shows that the L/R was
not aware of the impugned ex-parte orders dated 18.05.2023 & 14.07.2023
having been passed by CIT(A). Ld. AR submitted that it is thereafter the
assessee made further enquiries in the matter and lately came to know that
the impugned orders had been passed ex-parte whereby the first-appeals
had been dismissed for non-prosecution. Hence, there occurred impugned
delays in filing appeals. Ld. AR very humbly submitted that there is no
lethargy, negligence, mala fide intention or ulterior motive in making delay
and the L/R does not stand to derive any benefit because of delay. He
submitted that the sole reason of delay is as narrated which is a “sufficient
cause”. Ld. AR went ahead to submit that the assessee’s cases are quite
meritorious but the CIT(A) has dismissed appeals by passing a small para of
just 2-3 sentences which is not in accordance with section 250(6) of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 which provides that “The order of the Commissioner
(Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points
for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”.
Relying upon Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others
1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 (SC), Ld. AR prayed to condone the
delays and remand these matters back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication
afresh in accordance with section 250(6) after giving necessary opportunity
to L/R.
Page 6 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
Ld. DR for revenue fairly agreed to the submissions and prayer of Ld.
AR.
We have considered above submissions of both sides. We find that the
issue of delays in filing these appeals has been appropriately addressed by
Ld. AR/assessee and the Ld. DR does not have any objection against
condonation of delay. Further, in present case, there is a peculiar fact that
the assessee had deceased during pendency of first-appeals and the CIT(A)
being unaware of the factum of death has passed impugned orders without
taking Legal Representatives on record. Further, the CIT(A) has merely
dismissed assessee’s first-appeals for non-prosecution without making a
meritorious adjudication in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore,
looking into entire conspectus of case, we condone the filing-delays and
admit these appeals. Further, we remand these cases to the file of CIT(A) for
an apt adjudication in terms of section 250(6) after taking legal
representatives on record. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 26/06/2025
Sd/- Sd/-
(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 26/06/2025 Patel/Sr. PS
Page 7 of 8
Prabha Tripathi L/R of Late Raghav Ram Tripathi ITA No. 36 & 37/Ind/2025, AYs. 2011-12 & 2012-13
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 8 of 8
