LATE MR. NASEEM AHMAD,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3992/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 December 2025AY 2009-10Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal (Accountant Member)2 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the impugned reopening was not sustainable in law because the assessee had already passed away before the notice under Section 148 was issued. The appeal was allowed on this basis.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 was against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC. The reopening of assessment was challenged on the grounds that the assessee had passed away prior to the initiation of the proceedings.

What were the issues?

Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated after the death of the assessee. Whether reopening is sustainable when the assessee is deceased prior to the notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: Dr. G. S. Grewal, CA, Sh. Jaspal Singh
Hearing: 10.12.2025Pronounced: 10.12.2025

Asstt. Year: 2009-10 Late Mr. Naseem Ahmad, Vs ACIT, A-28/29, Abul Fazal Enclave, Circle-65(1), New Delhi-110025 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABXPA2478E Assessee by : Dr. G. S. Grewal, CA, Sh. Jaspal Singh & Harsimran Grewal, CAs Revenue by : Sh. Gouranga Chandra Das, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 10.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 10.12.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s/alleged legal heir’s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071727034(1) dated 31.12.2024, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset that the appellant has raised a legal ground challenging validity of the impugned reopening for the precise reason that the assessee Sh. Naseem Ahmad had left for his heavenly abode on 30.08.2013 followed by the Naseem Ahmad corresponding section 148 proceedings initiated against him vide notice dated 05.08.2015 onwards. That being the clinching case, we hereby quote Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 118 Taxmann.com 46 (Del.) to conclude that the impugned reopening itself is not sustainable in law. The same stand quashed in very terms.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →