← Back to search

NIKHIL JAIN LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. BEENA JAIN,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

PDF
ITA 4001/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 December 20253 pages

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWALAssessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Nikhil Jain, legal heir of Late Smt. Beena Jain, H-41, Green Park Extn., New Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(4), Delhi PAN: AAGPJ1088H (Appellant)

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

This appellant Sh. Nikhil Jain has filed his instant appeal for assessment year 2017-18 against the Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals)/National
Faceless
Appeal
Centre
[in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”],
Delhi’s
DIN and order no.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072627311(1), dated 28.01.2025, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,
1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Assessee by Sh. Vijay Jindal, CA
Department by Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
23.12.2025
Date of pronouncement
23.12.2025
2 | P a g e

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
2. For the reasons stated in the appellant’s condonation petition attributing delay for 80 days to the circumstances beyond its control, we quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji &
Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) to condone the delay.
3. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the impugned assessment itself initiated vide his notice dated 17.08.2018
whereas the assessee Smt. Bina Jain had already left for her heavenly abode very well before that on 03.02.2018. Learned
Assessing Officer had set into motion the impugned proceedings in the assessee’s case very well after her death only. Faced with this situation, learned CIT(DR) representing Revenue vehemently argues that it was very much incumbent for the deceased assessee’s legal representative(s) to bring her death to the notice of the Assessing Officer.
4. We find that this instant issue is no more res integra in light of Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 46 (Delhi) having already decided in the appellant’s favour and against the department that any such proceedings initiated after the assessee’s
3 | P a g e demise, are not sustainable in law. We accordingly quash the impugned reopening in very terms.
5. This appellant’s appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd December, 2025 (MANISH AGARWAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 29th December, 2025. RK/-

NIKHIL JAIN LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. BEENA JAIN,DELHI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE | BharatTax