← All Phrases

“legal representative”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(29)662 judgments

The decision most relied on for legal representative is 2 CIT v. Indrajit Singh Suri (33 Taxmann.com 281), cited in 100 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on legal representative

2 CIT v. Indrajit Singh Suri
33 Taxmann.com 281 · 2013 · High Court
100
citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147/148 against legal representatives of a deceased assessee requires a demonstrable 'reason to believe' that income escaped assessment, often based on third-party information such as alleged accommodation entries.

Savita Kapila v. ACIT
118 Taxmann.com 46 · 2020 · High Court
98
citing judgments

There is no legal requirement for a legal representative to report an assessee's death to the income tax department; consequently, a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 to a deceased person is invalid as it lacks proper jurisdiction.

Chandreshbhai Jayantibhai Patel v. ITO
101 Taxmann.com 362 · 2019 · High Court
46
citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is a jurisdictional notice and a condition precedent for reassessment. Such a notice issued against a deceased person is valid if the legal representative submits to the Assessing Officer without raising any objection.

CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff
48 ITR 59 · 1963 · Supreme Court
40
citing judgments

Assessment proceedings initiated against a deceased person are void. Once an assessee dies, assessment proceedings can only continue in the name of their legal representative, to the extent of the deceased's estate.

202 ITR 932, CIT v. Durgawati
31 ITR 603 · 1957 · High Court
36
citing judgments

The same income cannot be assessed substantively in multiple hands. However, this principle does not prevent a single consolidated assessment order for multiple legal representatives.

CIT v. Jai Prakash Singh
219 ITR 737 · 1996 · Supreme Court
36
citing judgments

A procedural defect in serving notices, such as issuing them after the assessee's death without proper service on legal representatives, can invalidate reassessment proceedings and render assessment orders void. However, an omission or defect in serving notices does not erase a tax liability created by substantive provisions, though it may render an order irregular.

Rajender Kumar Sehgal v. ITO
260 Taxmann 412 · 2019 · High Court
25
citing judgments

A notice issued to a deceased assessee or their legal representatives beyond the period of limitation is without jurisdiction and cannot be saved by Section 292B.

ITO Ward 1(3)(7), Surat v. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpara
114 Taxmann.com 482 · 2020 · Supreme Court
24
citing judgments

An assessment or reassessment proceeding initiated or continued against a deceased person after their demise is illegal and void ab initio, as no valid notice can be issued to a dead individual.

Judgments citing legal representative

Sureshbhai Ranchhodbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. ACIT Circle 5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1327/AHD/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1327 & 1328/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 & 2017-18) बनाम/ Sureshbhai Ranchhodbhai Acit Circle 5(2)(1), Ahmedabad Patel Vs. 1, Shayona Darshan & Bunglow, Opp. Gujarat High Court, Ghatlodia, Acit, Circle 6(1), Gujarat – 380061 Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Actpp1167A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R B Tank, A.R. Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. Dr Revenue By : 26/03/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 29/04/2025

For Appellant: Shri R B Tank, A.RFor Respondent: 26/03/2025
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)Section 57

days respectively in filing of the two appeals. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It is submitted that the legal representative of the assessee, who was representing the matter before the Ld. CIT(A), had expired on 07.09.2023. Due to his death, the assessee

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 3(2), Hyderabad

ITA 156/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Us:

Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

High Court of Delhi in the case of Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 426 ITR 502, no duty is cast upon a legal representative to intimate the factum of death of an assessee to the Income-tax department. Also, it was observed that as the notice under Section 148, dated

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Cirlce 3(2), Hyderabad

ITA 155/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2025AY 2016-2017
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 142Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

High Court of Delhi in the case of Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 426 ITR 502, no duty is cast upon a legal representative to intimate the factum of death of an assessee to the Income-tax department. Also, it was observed that as the notice under Section 148, dated

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Cirlce 3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 154/HYD/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

sake of clarity, the observations of the CIT(A) are culled out as under: ITA Nos.147 to 149 & 154/Hyd/2025 7. The legal representatives of the assessee (since deceased), being aggrieved with the order of CIT(A) have carried the matter in appeal before us. 8. We have heard the Learned ... principle of law, no order can be passed against a dead person and, any proceedings regarding the deceased assessee shall be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased. The aforesaid mandate of law can be gathered

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle 3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 149/HYD/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

sake of clarity, the observations of the CIT(A) are culled out as under: ITA Nos.147 to 149 & 154/Hyd/2025 7. The legal representatives of the assessee (since deceased), being aggrieved with the order of CIT(A) have carried the matter in appeal before us. 8. We have heard the Learned ... principle of law, no order can be passed against a dead person and, any proceedings regarding the deceased assessee shall be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased. The aforesaid mandate of law can be gathered

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 148/HYD/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

sake of clarity, the observations of the CIT(A) are culled out as under: ITA Nos.147 to 149 & 154/Hyd/2025 7. The legal representatives of the assessee (since deceased), being aggrieved with the order of CIT(A) have carried the matter in appeal before us. 8. We have heard the Learned ... principle of law, no order can be passed against a dead person and, any proceedings regarding the deceased assessee shall be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased. The aforesaid mandate of law can be gathered

Late Rajasekhar Chelikani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeals are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 147/HYD/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Us:

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159Section 2(22)(e)Section 251

sake of clarity, the observations of the CIT(A) are culled out as under: ITA Nos.147 to 149 & 154/Hyd/2025 7. The legal representatives of the assessee (since deceased), being aggrieved with the order of CIT(A) have carried the matter in appeal before us. 8. We have heard the Learned ... principle of law, no order can be passed against a dead person and, any proceedings regarding the deceased assessee shall be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased. The aforesaid mandate of law can be gathered

Maria Estibeiro, Panaji vs. DCIT, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

The appeal stands ALLOWED

ITA 34/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Maria Estibeiro L/H Of Jacintodas Estibeiro 781, St. Marys Colony, Miramar, Goa. Pan:Aabpe2798N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr D E Robinson [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Vimalraj Periyagounden [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 25/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/04/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By This Appeal Captioned Appellant Impugns Din & Order No. 1060336601(1) Dt. 31/01/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Nfac’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act For Assessment Year 2012- 13 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr D E Robinson [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Vimalraj Periyagounden [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)

Taxmann.com 82 (Bom)] whereby impugned notice and consequential assessment was quashed with a grant of appropriate liberty to proceed a fresh against legal representative who in all represents estate of deceased assessee. The revenue could hardly place any material to dismantle aforestated position of law and applicability thereof ... deceased assessee. It remain undisputed fact that, in assessing the escaped income of deceased assessee in reopened proceedings, the Revenue neither brought all legal representative [‘LR’] on record nor any fresh notice were issued in the name of such LRs. The system generated & digitally signed notice drawn in the name

Kusum Yadav, Indore vs. PCIT (1), Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 511/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Bagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253(1)Section 263

mind regarding the law of limitation and condonation of delay. 6.6 The Court was deciding a Special Leave Petition (SLP) preferred by the legal representatives of a man in a land acquisition case. The Two-Judge Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal mentioned the following principles

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 61/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 60/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 59/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 58/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabadq

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 57/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 56/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mohammed Imran Patni, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Central Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 55/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 132Section 153B(1)Section 153CSection 250Section 80C

have appreciated that notice under section 153C was issued to the assessee in the capacity of Imran Patni, individual, and not as Imran Patni, legal representative of Noor Mohammed Patni. Therefore, the notice and the order passed under section 153C are invalid on account of not having been issued

Mithla Yadav L/H of Late Gyan Singh Yadav, Gwalior vs. ITO 3(1), Gwalior

Appeal stand dismissed in above terms

ITA 412/AGR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 412/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) Smt. Mithla Yadav Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ (L/H Of Late Shri Gyan Singh Yadav) Ward 3(1), Gwalior. 67, Kaulonipura, Vs. Preetam Singh Ghas Mandi, Gwalior. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afbpy-6128-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Appellant Herein Smt. Mithla Yadav Has Filed The Instant Appeal Against An Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 21-06-2023 Confirming Assessment Order Dated 19-11-2018 As Passed By Ld. Ao Assessing Total Income Of Rs.107.01 Lacs. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 31 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned. 2. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing By Revenue That The Appellant Smt. Mithla Yadav Has Claimed Herself To Be The Legal Representative Of The Deceased Late Shri Gyan Singh Yadav 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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. DR
Section 159Section 2(29)

stand condoned. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing by revenue that the appellant Smt. Mithla Yadav has claimed herself to be the legal representative of the deceased Late Shri Gyan Singh Yadav 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

Indra Rani, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-2(1)(2), Ghaziabad

Appeal is allowed

ITA 142/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 142/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Late Indra Rani Vs Income Tax Officer, Through Legal Heir Pankil Garg (Son) Ward-2(1)(2), A-408, 4Th Floor, Tower-A, Saya Ghaziabad-101002 Zenith Apartment, Ahinsa Khand-2, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad-201014 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agspr0372G Assessee By: Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.04.2025 Order

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 148A

conclude that the impugned reopening itself is not sustainable in law. The same stand quashed in very terms. 4. This assessee’s/her legal representative’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22/04/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara) Judicial Member Dated: 22/04/2025 *Subodh Kumar

Sushma Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 1328/JPR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Arbind SharmaFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 156Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1328/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke Late Sushma Sharma, Income Tax Officer, Vs. through Legal representative Ward 5(1), Mahendra Kumar Sharma, Jaipur Plot No. 1, Narada Colony, Opposite Queen’s Road, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj

ITO, Ward-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Arka Properties Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 58/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.58/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16) Income Tax Officer Vs. Arka Properties (P) Ltd Ward 1 (1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aafca7411H (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. M. Narmada, Cit(Dr) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate H Srinivasulu, सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 17/04/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 23/11/2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, For The A.Y. 2015-16. 2. There Is A Delay Of 1 Day By The Revenue In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal & The Revenue Has Filed An Affidavit Explaining The Cause Of Delay. We Have Heard The Learned Dr As Well As The Learned Ar On The Condonation Of Delay. The Learned Ar Has Not Objected For Condonation Of Delay Of One Day In Filing

For Appellant: Advocate H SrinivasuluFor Respondent: : Smt. M. Narmada, CIT(DR)
Section 148Section 45

ACIT vs. Emaar MGF Constructions (P) Ltd (ITA No.1734/Del/2016) ITAT Delhi. 16) Dinesh Vazi Rani – 445 ITR 110 (Bom) 17) Kaushalya Devi (Deceased) through legal representative vs. CIT (4504ITR 136) (Del.) 18) CIT vs. Shakuntla Kantilal (190 ITR 56) (Bom.) 19) Gopeenath Paul