Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These appellant’s three appeals 4025 & 4026/Del/2025 for assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017- 18 arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders, all dated 13.11.2024, passed in cases no. CIT(A), Delhi-29 10236/2019-20, 10219/2019- 20 and 10220/2019-20 involving proceedings under section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Cases called twice. None appears at the appellant’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Delay of 140 days in filing of the assessee’s instant appeals is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
It next emerges with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the appellant herein Sh. Yashansh claims himself to be the legal representative of the assessee Late Sh. Yash Chowdhary, who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode. Faced with this situation, we note that there is not even an iota of indication in the appellant’s submissions that either he has succeeded to the estate of the deceased or he is managing the same or as intermeddler thereof; as the case may be, as per section 2(29) of the Act r.w.s. 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 defining such a “legal representative” in very terms. There is further no material on record that the appellant herein has been proceeded against the department under section 159 of the Act.
That being the case, we find no merit in the appellant’s claim as legal representative of the deceased assessee and reject his instant appeals at this stage in very terms, subject to a rider that he shall be at liberty to file a fresh appeal as and when he either satisfies the statutory conditions of a “legal representative” under section 2(11) (supra) or he is proceeded against by the department under section 159 of the Act, whichever is earlier. Ordered accordingly.