LATE KANAIYALAL R LALWANI,GODHRA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 43/AHD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 March 2022AY 2012-132 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the material defect of being filed in the name of a deceased person and the lack of proper legal heir substitution. The non-cooperative attitude of the appellant was also considered.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against a penalty confirmed by the CIT(A). The appeal was filed in the name of a deceased person, and the legal heir had not completed the necessary formalities to be brought on record.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of an appeal filed in the name of a deceased assessee without proper legal heir substitution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-

Hearing: 28/03/2022Pronounced: 28/03/2022

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘A’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (through web-based video conferencing platform) ] ] BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 Late Kanaiyalal R. Lalwani, The Dy. Commissioner of D-1, Sundar Apartment, Bamroli Vs Income-tax, Road, Godhra-389001 Central Circle-1, PAN : ACRPL 8538 P Vadodara अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri S.S. Shukla , DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 28/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 28/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-12, Ahmedabad (“CIT(A)” in short) dated 15.11.2018 whereby he confirmed the penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” in short).

2.

At the time of hearing fixed in this case today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. There was a similar non-compliance on the part of the assessee when this appeal was earlier fixed for hearing on 10.09.2021 and 31.01.2022. It is also noted that the impugned order was passed by the learned CIT(A) on 15.11.2018 in the name assessee, i.e. Kanaiyalal R. Lalwani, while in Form No.36 filed before the Tribunal the name of the appellant is mentioned as Late Kanaiyalal R. Lalwani. This appeal thus is filed in the name of a deceased person; and, although the same has been signed by one Shri Jayesh K. Lalwani claiming to be the legal heir of the Late Kanaiyalal R. Lalwani AY : 2012-13 2 deceased-assessee, the required formalities to bring the said legal heir on record are not completed. Keeping in view this material defect as well as the non-compliant and non-cooperative attitude of the appellant, we treat this appeal as not maintainable and dismiss the same accordingly.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th March, 2022 at Ahmedabad. (MADHUMITA ROY) VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad, Dated 28/03/2022 *Bt

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →