CIT v. M. Hemanathan

384 ITR 177High Court2016#9980 most cited
11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250Section 263

Issues it is cited on

violation of natural justiceservice of noticesection 263section 26unexplained moneysection 153cassistant commissionersection 153section 143(2)section 148section 142(1)section 147

Judgments citing CIT v. M. Hemanathan

BABUBHAI JOITARAM PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1, RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 22/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Sr. DR
Section 153CSection 250

…d against the deceased assessee. Accordingly, we quash the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s.263 of the Act and allow the appeal of the assessee.8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 15. Hon`ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M.Hemanathan, 384 ITR 177 (Mad-HC), held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir,who, then, participated in proceedings, such proceedings was a nullity beinginitiated against a dead person. It was also held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heirwho, then, participated in proceedings, said l…

BABUBHAI JOITARAM PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1, RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 23/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.15&23/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Babubhai Joitram Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ 9 Suvas Colony St Xaviers High Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, School Road. Gujarat-380 014 Central Circle –1, Rajkot, Income Tax Officer, Amruta Estate Building, M.G. Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdpp5355 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 153CSection 250

…d against the deceased assessee. Accordingly, we quash the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s.263 of the Act and allow the appeal of the assessee.8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 15. Hon`ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M.Hemanathan, 384 ITR 177 (Mad- HC), held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir, who, then, participated in proceedings, such proceedings was a nullity being initiated against a dead person. It was also held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir who, then, participated in proceedings, sa…

BABUBHAI JOITARAM PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1 RKT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 15/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.15&23/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Babubhai Joitram Patel, Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ 9 Suvas Colony St Xaviers High Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, School Road. Gujarat-380 014 Central Circle –1, Rajkot, Income Tax Officer, Amruta Estate Building, M.G. Road, Rajkot-360 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जी आइ आर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Abdpp5355 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 14/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Popat, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. Sr. (DR)
Section 153CSection 250

…d against the deceased assessee. Accordingly, we quash the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s.263 of the Act and allow the appeal of the assessee.8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 15. Hon`ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M.Hemanathan, 384 ITR 177 (Mad- HC), held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir, who, then, participated in proceedings, such proceedings was a nullity being initiated against a dead person. It was also held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir who, then, participated in proceedings, sa…

AMRATALAL KARSANDAS SAMANI,JAMKHAMBHALIYA vs. OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am.& & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.463/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Amrutlalkarsandassamani Vs. Principal Commissioner Rest House Road, Of Income Tax, Jodhpur Gate, Jamnagar-361008 Jam Khambhaliya, Dist: Devbhoomi Dwarka-361305. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afhps5447P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Mahesh Paun, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Pungalia, Ld. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27 /02 /2025 : 25 /04 /2025 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Paun, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Pungalia, Ld. CIT(DR)
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 68

…against the deceased assessee. Accordingly, we quash the order passed by the Pr. CIT u/s.263 of the Act and allow the appeal of the assessee.8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 15. Hon`ble High Court of Madras, in the case of M.Hemanathan, 384 ITR 177 (Mad-HC), held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heir,who, then, participated in proceedings, such proceedings was a nullity beinginitiated against a dead person. It was also held that where notice issued in name of deceased-assessee was served upon legal heirwho, then, participated in proceedings, said l…

BIMAL V. PALA LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SMT. RANJANA VRAJLAL PALA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2735/MUM/2016[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhbimal V Pala Vs. Principal Commissioner (Legal Heir Of Late Smt. Of Income Tax 26 Bkc C/O H.H. Parmar & Co. Bandra East 512, Maker Chambers, V. 221, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Apmpp6636G Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : M.V. Choksi Respondent By : S. Srinivasu Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Pcit-26, Mumbai, Dated 16.03.2016 For A.Y. 1996-97. The Assesse Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 & Setting Aside The Order Dated 19/03/2014 U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 On The Ground That It Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue. 2. On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Without Taking On Record The Details Submitted & Expecting To Do The Impossible Of Bring On Record The Lost Passport 3. On The Facts & Under The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit Erred In Passing Order U/S 263 Relying On Decision Of P A G E | 2 Bimal V. Pala Vs. Pcit-26 Rampyaridevi Saraogi Vs Cit 67 Itr 84(Sc), Taradevi Aggarwal Vs Cit 88 Itr 323(Sc) & Ramaswamy Chettiyar Vs Cit 220 Itr 657.665(Mad) Which Are Not Relevant To The Appellant. 4. The Appellant Reserves The Right & Alter/Amend Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Before The Hearing.”

For Appellant: M.V. ChoksiFor Respondent: S. Srinivasu
Section 143(3)Section 263

…r narrating aforesaid facts the ld. Counsel submitted that impugned order u/s 263 of the Act passed against the dead person is not valid in law. The ld. Counsel has also placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncement: “i. CIT Vs. M. Hemanathan (2016) 384 ITR 177 (Mad) ii. Mohammad Sharif Siddiqui Vs. ITO 20(2)(1) vide ITA No. 1179/Mum/2022 dated 29.12.2022 P a g e | 4 Bimal V. Pala Vs. PCIT-26 iii. Sheela Devi Vs. Pr.CIT vide ITA No. 1854/Del/2021 dated 03.03.2022 On the other hand, the ld. D.R relied on the order of lower authorities. 4. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. Without…

LATE MR. SHANKAR MUKUND SHENAI THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR SANGEETHA SAMIR KOPPIKAR,MUM vs. ITO-23(3)(3), MUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3241/MUM/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3241/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिधम Late Shri Shankar Mukund Income Tax Officer, 23 (3) Shenai (3) Vs. (Through His Legal Heir Room No.108, Sangeetha Samir Koppikar) Matrumandirtardeo, Grant Flat No. 1202, Anish Tower Road Senapatibapat Marg, Next To Mumbai-400 007 Ruparel College Matunga (W) Mumbai-400 018 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जी. आइ. आर. सं/.Pan/Gir No.Aahps4468D अपीलार्थी / Appellant .. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Puru Jain & Shri RajendrakumarFor Respondent: Shri Anil K. Das
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T.VARKEY, JM AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, AM आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.3241/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year: 2009-10) बिधम Late Shri Shankar Mukund Income Tax Officer, 23 (3) Shenai (3) Vs. (Through his Legal Heir Room No.108, Sangeetha Samir Koppikar) MatruMandirTardeo, Grant Flat No. 1202, Anish Tower Road SenapatiBapat Marg, Next to Mumbai-400 007 Ruparel College Matunga (W) Mumbai-400 018 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जी. आइ. आर. सं/.PAN/GIR No.AAHPS4468D अपीलार्थी / Appellant .. प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by: Shri Puru Jain & Shri Rajendrakumar Ja…

NAMRATA KAPALE ,CHINDWARA vs. PR.CIT-1, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is dismissed

ITA 41/JAB/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur08 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148(1)Section 159(2)(b)Section 263

…otice dated 30/12/2021, so that the ensuing proceedings were thus null and void. The only manner whereby the appellant could be proceeded against was by taking her on record, i.e., in terms of sec. 159(2)(b), even as explained in CIT v. Hemanathan (M.) [2016] 384 ITR 177 (Mad) – which also considers the decision by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Kaushalyabai v. CIT [1998] 238 ITR 1008 (MP), and which was not. Reliance is placed on Pr. CIT v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 416 ITR 613 (SC); and Sheela Devi v. Pr. CIT (in ITA No. 1853/Del/2021, dated 03/03/2022/WS-1, pgs. 4-14). In the former, notice u/s…

SMT. M.H. MAMATHA, L/R OF LATE SRI. M.N. HARINATH,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 3(2)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 16/BANG/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2008-09 Smt. M. H. Mamatha Legal Heir Of Income Tax Officer, Late Shri. M. N. Harinath, Ward – 3[2][2], No.947, 37Th Cross, Poornaprajna Vs. Bengaluru. Layout, Uttarhalli, Bsk 5Th Stage, Bengaluru – 560 061. Pan : Aeipm 2644 G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 26.08.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : .08.2020

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR)
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234Section 250Section 50C

…lhi High Court rendered in the case of Rajender Kumar Sehgal Vs. ITO as reported in 101 taxmann.com 233 (Del) copy available on pages 54 to 58 of Paper Book. c) Judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. M. Hemanathan as reported in 384 ITR 177 (Madras) copy available on pages 59 to 65 of the Paper Book. 3. He also submitted that the copy of notice issued by the AO under section 148 is available on page 22 of the Paper Book as per which it can be seen that Page 4 of 7 such notice was issued by the AO on 11.03.2015 and the same is issued in the name of the deceased assessee Shri. M. N. H…

JANARDAN GUPTA, LEGAL HEIR SHRI JITENDRA GUPTA,ANGUL vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-2, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/CTK/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.199/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Janardan Gupta(Deceased) Vs. Principal Cit-2, Through Legal Heir Bhubaneswar Jitendra Gupta, M/S Gupta Automobiles, Panchamahala, Angul स्थायी लेखा सं./Panno. : Acppgs 5186 I (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Subhendu Dutta,Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta,DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA No.199/CTK/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014) Janardan Gupta(Deceased) Vs. Principal CIT-2, Through Legal Heir Bhubaneswar Jitendra Gupta, M/s Gupta Automobiles, Panchamahala, Angul स्थायी लेखा सं./PANNo. : ACPPGS 5186 I (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, AR िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta,DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 15/10/2019 घोषणा की तािीख/Date…

SAMADHAN KRISHNA KATEKAR,RAIGAD vs. ITO WD 3 PANVEL, NAVI MUMBAI

In the result the ground No

ITA 3112/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri M. Balaganeshmr. Samadhan Krishna Ito. Ward-3, Katekar, L/H Of Late Krishna Vs. Panvel Range, Trifed Tower, Kathari Katekar, Opp. Khanda Colony, At Dhutum, Taluka-Uran, Navi Mumbai-410206. District-Raigad. Pan: Azrpk4713E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Mr. Prakash Pandit (Advocate) Respondent By : Shri Satish Rajore (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement :12.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal Under Section 253 Of Income Tax Act (Act) Is Directed Against

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Pandit (Advocate)For Respondent: Shri Satish Rajore (Sr. DR)
Section 132Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 253Section 254(1)

…/Mum/2017- 3112 Mum 2017 Samadhan Krishna Katekar Commissioner (Appeals) ignored binding decision of Third Member of Agra Tribunal in case of ITO Vs Sikandar Lal Jain (45 SOT 119) and the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT Vs M Hemanathan (384 ITR 177 Mad), whereby the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that principle of law which is mentioned by Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt. Kaushalyabai Vs CIT(supra) does not appears to be correct. Thus, it was argued that the law explained by Hon’ble Madras High Court is the correct explanation of law. 10. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the ass…

SMT. SOWMYA B. SUVARNA,BANGALORE vs. ITO, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 357/BANG/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Apr 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri S. Jayaraman, Accountent Member Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Respondent: Shri H.A.K. Rao, CA &
Section 148

…atives of the deceased assessee and therefore the assessment framed by the AO in pursuant to the notice u/s. 148 issued to a dead person is not sustainable in law. He has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of CIT Vs. M. Hemanathan (384 ITR 177) as well as decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Vipin Walia Vs. ITO 238 TAXMAN 1/67 taxmann.com 56 and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court have held that when the assessee was already dead prior to the issue of notice u/s. 148 then the department was required to proceed by issuing a notice to the legal representative of the decease…