“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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Harish Dharma Rathod (Represented Through Legal Heir Pushpa H. Rathod), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

The appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes as above

ITA 817/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Harish Dharma Rathod Ito Ward (Represented Through Legal 42(2)(3) Heir Pushpa H. Rathod) Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Room No. 37, Bmc Chowl M.K. Road 150 Suklaji Street, Behind New Marine Nishant Cinema, Mumbai Lines, Mumbai 400 008. 400 020. Pan : Abkpr9312B Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Sachin Kumar

Section 250

anything by filing an appeal with delay. b) The father of appellant passed away and it took some time to bring to get the legal representative on record. 3 Harish Dharma Rathod (represented through Legal Heir Pushpa H. Rathod) c) The appellant was not granted any opportunity to explain

Brightech Valves & Controls Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 52/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.Ta. No.52/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Brightech Valves & Controls Vs. Deputy Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Plot No.345, Gidc Kathwada. Income Tax, Kathwada, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad-382430. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Adjournment Application FiledFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 35(1)(ii)

Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkatta-II, (2015) (324) ELT 624 (SC). Kishanchand Chellaram vs. CIT (1980) AIR 2117, 1981 SCC (1)720. Heirs and legal representatives of late Jaswantbhai S. Patel vs. CIT (2008) 174 Taxman 2006 (Guj) iv) CIT vs. Indrajitsingh Sen (2013) 33 Taxmann.com 281 (Guj) v) DCIT

The ITO, Ward-3(3)(12), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Cawas Darasha Karaka, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 499/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Adjournment application filed

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 48Section 49(1)Section 55(2)(a)Section 69A

Limited) for the full enjoyment is subject to the condition that the payment of rent of Rs.607/- should be made to the heirs and legal representative of the said land provided at page 7 of lease deed dated 01.05.2012 which clearly demonstrates the property is a lease hold property

Late Abdulkadar Lashkari, Legal Heir- Abdulsatar Lashkari, Jamnagar vs. ITO, Ward - 2(7), Jamnagar

ITA 364/RJT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 364/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Hybrid Hearing) Late Abdulkadar Lashkari L/H Abdulsatar Lashkari Vs. The Ito Ward -2(7), Jamnagar Prop. Noori Fruit Agency Minara Fari, Vora Wad Subhash Market Jamnagar- 361001, Gujarat India "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaepl0027C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashta Maniyar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 1Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 288ASection 44ASection 68

Income Tax Appellate Proceedings: In the context of Income Tax Appellate proceedings, this implies that no single heir can claim to be the exclusive legal representative or owner of the entire estate of a deceased Muslim. The estate must be 4 LATE ABDULKADAR LASHKARI represented collectively by all heirs

Late (Mrs.) Mira Gautam, Kasganj vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3), Kasganj

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 201/AGR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.201/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Late Mrs. Meera Gautam Ito 3(3) (Through Mrs. Divyanshu Gautam) Kanganj बनाम/ C/O Pawan Gautam Vs. New Madhopuri, State Bank Colony, Kasganj 207 123 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ablpg-3886-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri Nitin Goyal & Amit Goyal – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.03.2025

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitin Goyal & Amit Goyal – Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

assessee has left for heavenly abode and represented by her daughter, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the legal representative (LR) to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file

Late Mohmad Shahid Th. L/H. Shahina Shahid, Aligarh vs. ITO.Ward-1(2), Aligarh

Appeal stand dismissed in above terms

ITA 15/AGR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.15/Agr/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 2. आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.16/Agr/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14; Smc Bench) Late Mohmad Shahid Ito, Ward-1(2) बनाम/ (Through L/H Shahina Shahid) Aligarh 2, Court Of Wards Compound, Aligarh Vs. Up – 202 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aenps-9627-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Deepak Singh (Advocate)-Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Singh (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR

Section 159Section 2(29)Section 271(1)(c)

dated 07-06-2017. 2. 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 ... 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

Late Mukhtarahmed Jaismohd Chowdhary Legal Representative Suhail Ahmed Mukhtarahmed Chowdhary, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 27(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 560/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr. M. S. Mathuria, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Ld. D.R

Section 147Section 250

dated 25.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, has made the addition of Rs.2,54,64,990/-. 2 (Late) Shri Mukhtarahmed Jaismodh Chowdhary Legal Representative - Suhail Ahmed Mukhtarahmed Chowdhary 3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said addition before the Ld. Commissioner, however, of no avail ... case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh accordingly in the above terms. 3 (Late) Shri Mukhtarahmed Jaismodh Chowdhary Legal Representative - Suhail Ahmed Mukhtarahmed Chowdhary 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open

Ab Sciex Pte. Ltd, Singapore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 804/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Sh. S. K. Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 44B

further clarified from Clause 11.1 which provides that DHR India shall at all times act only as an independent contractor, and never as a legal representative of the assessee. It further provides that nothing in this agreement shall be construed to give either party the power to direct or control

Jamilhusen Abdullatif Vijapura, Sabarkantha vs. The ITO, S.K. Ward-3, Himatnagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.100/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jamilhusen Abdullatif The Ito बनाम/ Vijapura S.K. Ward-3 V/S. At Lalpur, Po Savgadh, Himatnagar – 383 001 Himatnagar – 383 001 (Gujarat) Sabarkantha (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Ahepv 6442 J (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Varis Isani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 11 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

principles of natural justice. 7.1. It is settled principle of law that a party should not suffer due to the mistake of their legal representative if there is no deliberate default on their part. In the present case, the assessee has demonstrated a genuine reason for non-compliance

Govindji Budhaji Thakor, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 87/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.87/Ahd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Govindji Budhaji Thakor The Ito Shakar Bhuwan बनाम / Ward-3(3)(2) Makarbiya Wad V/S. Ahmedabad – 380 015 B/H. Karnavati Club S.G. Highway, Mohmedpura Ahmedabad – 380 058 स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Apopc 8837 L (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Manish J. Shah & Rushin Patel, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 11/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12/03/2025 आदेश/Order Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.02.2024, Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18, Arising Out Of The Ex-Parte Assessment Order Dated 19/11/2019 Passed Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act"], By The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(3)(2), Ahmedabad [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”].

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 69A

consultant, it was discovered that no appeal had been filed before the Tribunal within the prescribed 60-day period. • The assessee immediately engaged a legal representative, and the appeal was eventually filed on 13.01.2025, resulting in a delay of 258 days. 6. On the background of the facts and circumstances

Yuvraaj Vivek Budhwani(Legal Representative of Late Vivek Budhwani), Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi

ITA 5857/MUM/2024[AY 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2025

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Ms. Varsha Valendra, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. A/R

VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5857 & 5962/Mum/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2016-17 Yuvraaj Vivek Budhwani (Legal Representative of Late Vivek Budhwani) Vs National Faceless Appeal Centre B/403-404, Silver Beach Apartment A.B. Nair Road Juhu, Opp. Juhu Post Officer Mumbai - 400049 [PAN: FCMPB5510D

Sachin Pandurang Alhat, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.8/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sachin Pandurang Alhat, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.202, Bld No.P6, A S Ward-10(2), Pune. Wing, Gandarwanagari, Pune – 412501. Pan:Ahepa6396E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S. Pathak & Mrs. Arrchena Sheety Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 05.11.2024 For Assessment Year 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Appellant Has Not Been Duly Represented By His Iip In The Course Of Assessment Proceedings & Have Again Not Been Duly

Section 148Section 250

account of reasonable opportunity for failure of his Authorized Representative & Justice should prevail & Appellant should not suffer due to fault & negligence of his Legal Representative. ITA No.8/PUN/2025 [A] 6. The Appellant Craves Leave to add, Alter, or amend any of the Grounds of the Appeal, before or during hearing

Shailendra Garg, Sriganganagar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical

ITA 1554/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Section 2(22)(e)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271BSection 271FSection 40Section 80C

आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR (Virtual Hearing) डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी

Arthi Baliga, Chennai vs. ACIT, NFAC, Delhi

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

ITA 1559/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1559/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arthi Baliga, Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 15, Flat No. 3-C, Coral Woods Income Tax, Chennai-4, Apartment, Sri Ram Nagar, South Chennai. Street, Alwarpet, Chennai 600 018. [Pan:Bkjpb5416P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate & Shri Varun Ranganathan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai-4, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Kannan, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

provisions of that Chapter (3) Every person who was at the time of such discontinuance or dissolution a partner of the firm, and the legal representative of any such person who is deceased, shall be jointly and severally liable for the amount of tax, penalty or other sum payable ... partnership consists of two partners, on the death of one of them, the partnership stands dissolved and, thereafter, there is no question of the legal representative of the deceased partner stepping into his place and attaining the status of a partner. Indeed, to recognise such a situation would have

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Mulliambal Rathnasamy Pitchakannu Eraavanan, Chennai

In the result, both the appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 1810/CHNY/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/2024 [In Ita No. 1810/Chny/2024] The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Shri Arvind E & Mrs. Baskaravalli Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), (Legal Heir Of Late Shri Mrp Investigation Building, Eraavanan), No. 4, Rice Mill Road, Chennai. Erimedu, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore 641 045. [Pan:Aaape5554D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 11.02.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Chennai For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Dr Shri S. Sundar Rajan, Cit Drew Our Attention To Additional Grounds Raised By The Appellant – Revenue. He Submits That The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Erroneous On Facts Of The Case

For Appellant: Shri S. Sundar Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri C. Khathiravan, Advocate

Section 159Section 2

settled principle of law that the order passed in the name of deceased person do not automatically become void, provided that the legal representative is available to continue the proceedings in accordance with section 159 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. He drew our attention ... expressly provides that where a person dies before any proceeding is taken against them under the Act, such proceeding may be continued against the legal representative of the 3 I.T.A. No.1810/Chny/24 & C.O. No. 74/Chny/24 deceased person. The said provision ensures that rights and obligations of the deceased assessee

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 3328/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3327/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2009-10) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3328/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Late Smt. B. Devahie Acit (Represented By Dr. Balakrishna Central Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Raja – Legal Representative) Chennai. Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Ahupb-6579-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee By : Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Revenue By : Shri A. Sasikumar (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-02-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25-02-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar (CIT) - Ld. DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 68

सं./ ITA No.3328/Chny/2018 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Late Smt. B. Devahie ACIT (Represented by Dr. Balakrishna Central Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Raja – Legal Representative) Chennai. Vs. 9/16, Venkatesan Street, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 014. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.AHUPB-6579-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Assessee ... addition made by Ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act. The deceased assessee Late Smt. B. Devahie is represented by Dr. Balakrishna Raja (Legal Representative). The revised Forms 36, to that effect, for all the years, have been filed and the same are kept on record

B Devahie, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Cir-3(3), Chennai

The appeals stand allowed

ITA 3327/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri K.G. Raghunath (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar (CIT) - Ld. DR

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 68

Kishan Das Maheshwari, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jaipur

Appeal is allowed and the impugned

ITA 43/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S. R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, JCIT-DR

Section 144Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 68

been challenged. 2 Kishan Das Maheshwari vs. DCIT 2. Vide impugned order, Ld. CIT(A) has disposed off appeal filed by the said legal representative of Sh. Kishan Das Maheshwari, and thereby directed Assessing Officer to make afresh assessment in accordance with rules. 3. Vide assessment order dated 30.05.2023, Assessing ... reason being that the assessee had expired much prior to the initiation of proceedings. As claimed by the legal representative, Kishan Das Maheshwari died on 05.06.2019 and income tax return for the Assessment Year 2019-20 was filed through his wife - legal representative on 31.07.2020. 3 Kishan Das Maheshwari

Hcc Cp Pl Jv, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1005/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2018-19 Hcc Cp Pl Jv, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward –14(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaaah5541G. (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Appeared Through Hybrid Mode) Revenue By: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala, Sr.DR

Section 194CSection 199Section 238Section 238(1)

Where through death, incapacity, insolvency, liquidation or other cause, a son is unable to claim or receive any refund due to him, his legal representative or the trustee or guardian or receiver, as the case may be, shall be entitled to claim or receive such refund for the benefit

Shri Kishan Yadav, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer, Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 487/IND/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 54B

assessee in this appeal was “Shri Kishan Yadav” who has expired on 13.09.2019, therefore present appeal has been filed and is being pursued by Legal Representative Shri Ashok Yadav, eldest son of assessee. Accordingly, the case title is modified to “Late Kishan Yadav (Th. Legal Rep. Ashok Yadav)” and taken ... record. For convenience, “Shri Kishan Yadav” shall be referred as “assessee or deceased assessee” and “Shri Ashok Yadav” shall be referred as “Legal Representative [“L/R”]” in subsequent discussions. 3. The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 1731 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee