legal representative — 662 judgments | BharatTax

PANKAJ SETHI L/H BRIJ MOHAN SETHI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed as premature at this\nstage in above terms subject to all just exceptions

ITA 9006/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Section 143(3)Section 159Section 2(11)Section 2(29)

next emerges with the able assistance coming from the\nRevenue side that the appellant herein Sh. Pankaj Sethi claims\nhimself to be the legal representative of the assessee Late Sh. Brij\nMohan Sethi, who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode on\n19.10.2019. Faced with this situation ... case may be, as per\nsection 2(29) of the Act r.w.s.2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure,\n1908 defining such a “legal representative” in very terms. There is\nfurther no material on record that the appellant herein has been\nproceeded against by the department under section

MOHD IRFAN ANWAR QURESHI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT C C 5(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 8725/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: 1. Reopening Without Valld Jurisdiction-Sections 147 & 148

Section 144Section 148ASection 159Section 69A

reassessment void ab initio. 2. Invalid Assumption of Jurisdiction on Legal Heir-Section 159 2.1 The Learned AQ erred in treating the Appellant as legal representative of the deceased without establishing inheritance of tax liability in accordance with law. 2.2 The business admittedly continued in the Appellant's proprietary capacity

MOHD.IRFAN ANWAR QURESHI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT C C 5(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 8724/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: 1. Reopening Without Valld Jurisdiction-Sections 147 & 148

Section 144Section 148ASection 159Section 69A

reassessment void ab initio. 2. Invalid Assumption of Jurisdiction on Legal Heir-Section 159 2.1 The Learned AQ erred in treating the Appellant as legal representative of the deceased without establishing inheritance of tax liability in accordance with law. 2.2 The business admittedly continued in the Appellant's proprietary capacity

MOHD.IRFAN ANWAR QURESHI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 5(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 8723/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: 1. Reopening Without Valld Jurisdiction-Sections 147 & 148

Section 144Section 148ASection 159Section 69A

reassessment void ab initio. 2. Invalid Assumption of Jurisdiction on Legal Heir-Section 159 2.1 The Learned AQ erred in treating the Appellant as legal representative of the deceased without establishing inheritance of tax liability in accordance with law. 2.2 The business admittedly continued in the Appellant's proprietary capacity

MRS. SUREKHA LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LATE SHRI. DEVARAJ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(5), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2419/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19 Mrs. Surekha (Legal Representative Of Late Shri Devaraj, Since Dead) No.112, 1St Main, Ramarao Layout Vs. Ito Bsk 3Rd Phase, 3Rd Stage Ward 7(2)(5) Bengaluru 560 085 Bengaluru Pan No :Asvps2939R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Balachandran, A.R. Respondent By : Sri N. Balusamy, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.03.2026

For Appellant: Sri Balachandran, A.RFor Respondent: Sri N. Balusamy, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 250

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2018-19 Mrs. Surekha (Legal Representative of Late Shri Devaraj, since dead) No.112, 1st Main, Ramarao Layout Vs. ITO BSK 3rd Phase, 3rd Stage Ward 7(2)(5) Bengaluru ... assessee vehemently submitted that the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was also not issued to any of the legal representatives as per the provision contained in Section 159(2)(b) of the Act. Further, by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case

MVR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 1254/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Filed Petitions For Condonation Of Delay Along With Affidavits Explaining The Reasons Contending, Inter Alia, That The Appeal Could Not Be Filed Within The Period Of Limitation Due To Miscommunication & Misguidance With The Appointed Learned Counsel Regarding The Case Proceedings To The Assessee. Further, The Appellant, Relied Entirely On The Learned Counsel & The Company'S Internal Accounting Staff For Updates & Developments, Was Under The Bona Fide Impression That The Proceedings Were Being Diligently Pursued & Attended. In Addition To That, The Part Time Accountant, Mr. Pedditi Gopal Reddy Who Was Managing The Accounts Of The Appellant'S Company & Dealt With Appointed Counsel Unfortunately Fell Gravely Ill During The Covid-19 Pandemic Period & Passed Away Which Led To A Breakdown In The Flow Of Communication Between The Assessee & Their Legal Representative. The Assessee Only

For Appellant: Srinavya Adabala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR

Section 253(3)

during the Covid-19 pandemic period and passed away which led to a breakdown in the flow of communication between the assessee and their legal representative. The assessee only 3 ITA.No.1253/Hyd./2025 found out that the appeal was dismissed much later, upon making a proactive inquiry with the Counsel ... caution. The statutory provisions mandate that applications for condonation of delay and applications belatedly filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation for bringing the legal representatives on record, should be rejected unless sufficient cause is shown for condonation of delay. The larger benches as well as equi-benches of this

MVR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 1253/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Filed Petitions For Condonation Of Delay Along With Affidavits Explaining The Reasons Contending, Inter Alia, That The Appeal Could Not Be Filed Within The Period Of Limitation Due To Miscommunication & Misguidance With The Appointed Learned Counsel Regarding The Case Proceedings To The Assessee. Further, The Appellant, Relied Entirely On The Learned Counsel & The Company'S Internal Accounting Staff For Updates & Developments, Was Under The Bona Fide Impression That The Proceedings Were Being Diligently Pursued & Attended. In Addition To That, The Part Time Accountant, Mr. Pedditi Gopal Reddy Who Was Managing The Accounts Of The Appellant'S Company & Dealt With Appointed Counsel Unfortunately Fell Gravely Ill During The Covid-19 Pandemic Period & Passed Away Which Led To A Breakdown In The Flow Of Communication Between The Assessee & Their Legal Representative. The Assessee Only

For Appellant: Srinavya Adabala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR

Section 253(3)

during the Covid-19 pandemic period and passed away which led to a breakdown in the flow of communication between the assessee and their legal representative. The assessee only 3 ITA.No.1253/Hyd./2025 found out that the appeal was dismissed much later, upon making a proactive inquiry with the Counsel ... caution. The statutory provisions mandate that applications for condonation of delay and applications belatedly filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation for bringing the legal representatives on record, should be rejected unless sufficient cause is shown for condonation of delay. The larger benches as well as equi-benches of this

MADAN MOHAN RAO PUVVADA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1152/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1152/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Madan Mohan Rao The Income Tax Puvvada, Hyderabad. Officer, Ward-5(1), Vs. Pin – 500 063. Hyderabad. Pan Agjpp4754H Telangana. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 263

Adarshnagar, Hyderabad City, Telangana State. Hereinafter called and referred to as the “VENDEES” which term shall mean and include their heirs, legal representatives, executors, administrators and assignees etc. of the SECOND PART. 2.4. Further the said property was purchased in the joint names of assessee and his wife

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2079/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

acted irresponsibly and with negligence and, thus, there was an ex-facie lack of bona fide. It was held that the conduct of the legal representatives of the sole deceased evinced that they had acted with callousness. It was in that factual context, that the Hon'ble Apex court

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2050/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

acted irresponsibly and with negligence and, thus, there was an ex-facie lack of bona fide. It was held that the conduct of the legal representatives of the sole deceased evinced that they had acted with callousness. It was in that factual context, that the Hon'ble Apex court

JADAGADDER PAKKERAPPA, LEGAL HEIR SAROJAMMA,SHIKARIPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS,, SHIMOGA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1406/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Sri Varun Bhat, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Balusamy N., D.R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 15Section 250

assessee vehemently submitted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was also not issued to any of the legal representatives as per the provision contained in Section 159(2)(b) of the Act. Further, by relying on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case ... proceedings. 9.3 At this juncture, it is apposite here to mention the relevant provisions of section 159 of the Act, which reads as follows:- “Legal representatives. 159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable

G2K TRUST,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3114/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3113 & 3114/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 G2K Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 5, Abila Avenue, Santosh Garden, Ward 2(1), Kulumani Main Road, Woraiyur, Tiruchirappalli. Trichy 620 102. [Pan: Aactg4763G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. K. Abhirame, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. T. Mythili, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 04.07.2025 & 15.07.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A), Panaji For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Ms. K. Abhirame, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT

Section 143(1)

Further, she drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by Legal Representatives and Others v. Special Deputy Collector (LA) reported in (2024) 12 SCC 336 and argued that it is necessary in the interest of justice with ... thus, the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay is not applicable. 20. In the case of Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by Legal Representatives and Others v. Special Deputy Collector (LA) (supra), at para 18 of the order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under

G2K TRUST,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), TRICHY

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3113/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3113 & 3114/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 G2K Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 5, Abila Avenue, Santosh Garden, Ward 2(1), Kulumani Main Road, Woraiyur, Tiruchirappalli. Trichy 620 102. [Pan: Aactg4763G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. K. Abhirame, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. T. Mythili, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 02.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Dated 04.07.2025 & 15.07.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A), Panaji For The Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively.

For Appellant: Ms. K. Abhirame, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT

Section 143(1)

Further, she drew our attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by Legal Representatives and Others v. Special Deputy Collector (LA) reported in (2024) 12 SCC 336 and argued that it is necessary in the interest of justice with ... thus, the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay is not applicable. 20. In the case of Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by Legal Representatives and Others v. Special Deputy Collector (LA) (supra), at para 18 of the order, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under

MOHAMMAD UMAR ABDUL HASAN KHAN (THROUGH LEGAL HEIR WIFE HASEENA BANO),BOISER vs. WARD 1, PALGHAR, PALGHAR

ITA 8815/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Kirit ShethFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 159

also does not appeal to us in the facts of the present case. Admittedly, no notices were issued to the legal representatives. The notices were issued to the dead person, and consequently, the legal representatives cannot be said to know about such notices. In such circumstances, the impugned notices ... impugned order made based thereon and same binds the legal representatives. 10. In Devendra (supra.), Gourang Anil Wakade (supra.), and Sumit Balkrishna Gupta (supra.), the Coordinate Benches of this Court have consistently held that notices to a dead person or orders against a dead person are null and void. Following

VINOD YADAV,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (3), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 398/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Chowdhary, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)(ii)Section 50CSection 53A

Mahabir Prasad\nwho is said to have died on 16.2.2012. The prayer in the IA is to allow substitution of\nthe three heirs and legal representatives mentioned in paragraph 1 of the IA.\nIn the facts of the case, the prayer for substitution is allowed. Let the three heirs

HARI NARAYAN GUPTA (HUF),PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (5), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 384/PAT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna23 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Section 133(6)Section 148Section 2(47)(v)Section 50C

Mahabir\nPrasad who is said to have died on 16.2.2012. The prayer in the IA is to allow\nsubstitution of the three heirs and legal representatives mentioned in paragraph 1 of\nthe IA.\nIn the facts of the case, the prayer for substitution is allowed. Let the three heirs

THAMBURAJ BERNET MARY JAYASEELI,TIRUCHIRAPPALLI vs. ITO, WARD2(1), CHENNAI, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3422/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.R. Santhanu, CAFor Respondent: Mr.Kumar Chandan, JCIT

Section 148

Statute. Nothing has been placed before this Court by the Revenue to show that there is a statutory obligation on the part of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee to immediately intimate the death of the assessee or take steps to cancel the PAN registration. 18. In such circumstances ... legal heirs of the deceased and beyond that date, it could not have proceeded in the matter even by issuing notice to the legal representatives of the assessee. The decision in Vipin Walia (supra) fully supports the case of the petitioner herein. 22. The decision in the case of Vipin

MRS. JEANETTE DSOUZA LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LATE SHRI. VINOD DSOUZA),MANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALORE

In the result, with above direction to the learned assessing officer, the ground No

ITA 2348/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 Mrs. Jeanette Dsouza, Lr Of Late Shri Vinod Dsouza, Flat No. San F 10, The Income Tax Officer, Holy Family Apartments, Ward – 1(1), Vs. Lalbagh, Mangalore, Mangalore. Karnataka – 575 003. Pan: Adhpd4076H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Prasanna Shenoy, CA

Section 139Section 142Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 159Section 55

Date of Pronouncement : 10-02-2026 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – PRESIDENT 1. Caption appeal is filed by Mrs. Jeanette D'Souza being legal representative of late Sri Vinod D'Souza (the assessee/appellant) for assessment year 2016 – 17 against the appellate order passed by National faceless appeal Centre, Delhi

LATE ADIREDDY RAMA REDDY L/R BY T N JAYALAKSHMI ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2042/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Avinash Mallya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Saravanan, Addl. CIT – DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 54F

dead person. We are of the view that the AO could not initiate any proceedings on the dead person without impleading the legal representatives. The following judgments are relied on by the assessee in support of their case that the assessment made on the dead person is liable

RAKESH JAIN AS THE LEGAL HEIR OF BHAWARLAL SHRILAL JAIN ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-1 PALGHAR , MUMBAI

In the result, all four appeals of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 7677/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 7674/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) 2. Ita No. 7675/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) 3. Ita No. 7676/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 4. Ita No. 7677/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rakesh Jain As Legal Ito Ward-1, Heir Of Bhawarlal Shrilal Bidco Road, Jain, Vs. Palghar, Shop 5, Vaibhav Complex, Maharashtra – Irani Road, Malyan, 401 404 Dahanu Road, Thane – 401602, Maharashtra. Pan/Gir No. Abjpj5270F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suchek Anchaliya, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Am: These Four Appeals Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], All Dated 26.09.2025 & 18.09.2025, For Assessment Year 2013– 14. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Arise Out Of The Same Set Of Facts & Relate To Proceedings Initiated In The Name Of Late Shri Bhawarlal Shrilal Jain, These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 159Section 271FSection 69A

complete the reassessment under section 147 read with section 144 in the name of the deceased person without invoking the provisions relating to legal representatives. 16. The learned AR also specifically drew our attention to the enquiry letter issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Palghar dated ... subsequent proceedings including reassessment and penalty proceedings were initiated and completed in the name of the deceased person without taking steps to bring the legal representative on record in accordance with law. 19. The learned AR further invited our attention to the copy of the return of income filed