GYANOBA PANDURANG PANZADE TROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR MANOJ GYANOBA PANZADE,PARBHANI vs. ITO OFFICER, PARBHANI

It emerges at the outset that the appellant herein Shri Manoj Gyanoba Panzade claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee Gyanoba Pandurang Panzade on the one hand, whereas the learned NFAC has 2 ITA.No.447/PUN./2024 rejected the latter’s lower appeal for non-payment of advance tax u/sec.249(4)(b) of the Act. Meaning thereby that the assessee herein prima facie appears to have left for his heavenly abode during the course of lower appellate proceedings and none of his legal heir(s) had been impleaded as “legal representative(s)” before the learned NFAC; after satisfying the statutory conditions u/sec.2(29) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with sec.2(11) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908. That being the case, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the instant appeal back to the learned NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication after first getting the legal representatives impleaded in foregoing terms followed by necessary adjudication thereof as per law. It is further made clear before parting that this tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the appellant’s status as the deceased assessee’s legal representative as the same is yet to be determined in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.