Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, Smt. Shahina Shahid, filed two appeals against orders confirming the assessment and penalty orders against the deceased Late Shri Mohmad Shahid. She claims to be the legal representative of the deceased.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appellant had not proved herself to be the legal representative of the deceased as per the statutory provisions, nor was there any material to establish this fact. Consequently, the appeals could not be entertained.
Key Issues
Whether the appellant has successfully established her status as the legal representative of the deceased assessee to maintain the appeals.
Sections Cited
2(29) of Income Tax Act, 2(11) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, 159 of the Act, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
The appellant herein Smt. Shahina Shahid has filed the instant two appeals against separate orders of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 27- 12-2021 / 22-12-2021 confirming Ld. AO’s assessment order dated 26-12-2016 as well as penalty u/s 271(1)(c) order dated 07-06-2017.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the appellant Smt. Shahina Shahid has claimed herself to be the legal representative of the deceased Late Shri Mohmad Shahid who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode. The Ld. Sr. DR submits that neither she has proved herself as the legal representative as per Section 2(29) of Income Tax Act r.w.s 2(11) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 nor any action has been taken against her u/s 159 of the Act. The aforesaid position remains uncontroverted before us. No material could be shown to us to establish the fact the appellant is legal representative of the deceased assessee in terms of the statutory provisions.
That being the case we are of the considered view that unless an applicant like the present appellant before us proves that he / she is either managing the estate of the deceased or act as an intermeddler or there have been proceedings u/s 159 of the Act, no such appeal could be entertained in the capacity of a legal representative. We accordingly dismiss both the appeals as premature with a liberty to appellant to initiate the same afresh as when the fact is proved that the appellant is managing the estate of the deceased assessee or proceeded with u/s 159 of the Act, as the case may be, whichever is earlier. Ordered accordingly.
Appellant’s both appeal stand dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.