← 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

Income Tax Officer 22 3 1, Mumbai vs. Yakub Mohamed Ghantiwala Through Legal Heir of Late Yakub Mohamed Ghantiwala Bibi Yakub Mohamed Ghan, Jogeshwari (West)

ITA 3171/MUM/2025[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil ChoudharyFor Respondent: Shri Mohammad Shahab Khan
Section 144Section 148

appeals are clubbed, heard and a common order is passed. 3. In this case, for both the years, the issue is that the legal representative raised a basic question- whether the notice on a dead person is valid and whether consequential order passed has any legal sanctity ... Taxman.com 46), Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that in the absence of a statutory provisions, a duty cannot be cast upon legal representatives to intimate factum on death of assessee to Department and, thus, where Assessing Officer issued a notice to assessee under Section 148 after his death

Income Tax Officer -22(3)(1), Mumbai, Piramal Chambers Lalbaug vs. Yakub Mohamed Ghantiwala Through Legal Heir of Late Yakub Mohamed Ghantiwala Bibi Yakub Mohamed Ghan, Jogeshwari West

ITA 3170/MUM/2025[2011]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am)

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil ChoudharyFor Respondent: Shri Mohammad Shahab Khan
Section 144Section 148

appeals are clubbed, heard and a common order is passed. 3. In this case, for both the years, the issue is that the legal representative raised a basic question- whether the notice on a dead person is valid and whether consequential order passed has any legal sanctity ... Taxman.com 46), Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that in the absence of a statutory provisions, a duty cannot be cast upon legal representatives to intimate factum on death of assessee to Department and, thus, where Assessing Officer issued a notice to assessee under Section 148 after his death

Dinesh Daga, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-5(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 472/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

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

Income Tax Officer Ward -2 (1), Amritsar vs. Ms. Savita Bansal, Through Legal Heir Sh. Parveen Kumar Bansal, Amritsar

In the result, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 240/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 240/Asr/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Income Tax Officer Smt. Savita Bansal Ward-2(1) बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Amritsar 143001 H.No. 272, Green Avenue Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. Cross Objection No. 1/Amritsar/2024 (In Ita No. 240/Asr/2023) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Savita Bansal Income Tax Officer बनाम/ (Through L/H Shri Parveen Kumar Bansal) Ward-2(1) H.No. 272, Green Avenue Amritsar 143001 Vs. Amritsar-143001. "थायीलेखासं./Pan. Abmpb-3594-K (Assessee) / Acnpk-4131-D (Lh) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () Aforesaid Appeal By Revenue For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016- 1. 17 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Dr Rakesh Gupta (Advocate) –Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas Kumar (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

this case law, it was held by Hon’ble Court that wherein it was duly disclosed in return that it was filed by legal representative of deceased assessee, jurisdictional notice issued against deceased assessee and assessment order passed against dead person on his PAN without bringing on record all legal ... proceedings for assessment or reassessment. A notice issued under section 148 of the Act against a dead person is invalid, unless the legal representative submits to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer without raising any objection." Consequently, in view of the above, a reopening notice under section

Mahendra Singh Jain, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-1(4), Ghaziabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3848/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2012-13 Mahendra Singh Jain, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ch. No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Ward 1(4), Ghaziabad Rdc, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad (Pan: Afhpj7049A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. & Shri Govil Aggarwal, Ca Respondent By : Shri Sangeet Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 06.08.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.2.2025 Passed By The Addl./Jcit(A), Patnan For Ay 2012-13 On The Following Grounds:- 1. Because, The Order Of The Ld. Lower Authority Is Bad In Law & Against The Facts & Circumstance Of The Case. 2. Because, The Cit(A) Grossly Erred In Sustaining The Impugned Proceeding & Assessment Order Whereby All The Notices U/S. 142(1)/144 & Impugned Order Were Issued In The Name Of Deceased Person Against The Provisions Of Section 159 Of The Act Hence, The Order Is Null & Void.

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Sangeet Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 159

passed on 13.11.2019 u/s. 144/147 of the Act in the name of the deceased person, without substituting the name of legal representatives of deceased. Thus, I hold that assessment proceedings and assessment order in the name of dead person is without jurisdiction and thus the same is hereby quashed. This

ACIT-CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. Raniben Khimji Patel, Legal Heir of Shri Khimji Karamshi Patel, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal filed by the revenue are accordingly dismissedand order of Ld

ITA 1743/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanacit-Cc-7(3) Vs. Ranibenkhimji Patel R. No. 655, (Legal Heir Of Shri 6Thfloor,Aayakar Bhavan, Khimjikaramshi M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 Patel), 020 602, 6Th Floor, Petit Tower, August Kranti Marg, Kemps Corner, Mumbai-400 026 Pan/Gir No. Aadpp8816G (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. Dr Assessee By Shri Rushabh Mehta, Ld. Ar Date Of Hearing 03.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm:

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 69C

procedure laid down in the Act. The AO after becoming aware of death of the assessee, it was incumbent to bring the legal representative on record before proceeding in the matter. The deceased assessee namely, Mr. KhimjiKaramshi Patel had expired on 02.03.2021 and the assessee had duly intimated ... That the legal heir Mrs. RanibenKhimji Patel had proactively filed an application on the Income Tax Portal on 23.08.2021 seeking registration as the legal representative RanibenKhimji Patel (Legal Heir of Shri KhimjiKaramshi Patel) of Late Mr. KhimjiKaramshi Patel and the said application was duly approved by the Department

Evergreen Infrastructures, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3171/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya,ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR) a/w
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 69C

partner,it is submitted that non compliance is mainly attributed to lack of technical competence, being not very educated,he depended on the legal representative who did not inform of the income tax proceedings in time leading to non-compliance. 11. We have heard both the parties and perused

Evergreen Infrastructures, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 31(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the above appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3170/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya,ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra (CIT DR) a/w
Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 68Section 69C

partner,it is submitted that non compliance is mainly attributed to lack of technical competence, being not very educated,he depended on the legal representative who did not inform of the income tax proceedings in time leading to non-compliance. 11. We have heard both the parties and perused

Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 959/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon'ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 958/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 957/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 956/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

ITA 955/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Pcit (Central)-2, Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Pcit (Central)-2, Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore - 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Pcit (Central)-2, Vs. Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) & Shri. S.Anatharaman, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Bipin C.N, Cit. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2025 :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'सी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'C' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री मनु कुमार गिरि, न्यायिक

Subramaniam Mohan Sudaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT, Central, Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 954/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon'ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 953/CHNY/2025[953]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 952/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Coimbatore vs. PCIT (Central), Chennai

In the result both the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2017-

ITA 951/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 951 To 953/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aerpm-3937-R] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 954 & 955/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Subramaniam Mohan Sundaram Pcit (Central)-2, Legal Heir Of Late Smt. K.Lakshmi, Vs. Chennai. 395, Oppanakara Street Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aazpl-6816-A] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 956 To 959/Chny/2025 ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-19 & 2020-21 Mohansundaram Jayasuja, Pcit (Central)-2, 395, Oppanakara Street Vs. Chennai. Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan: Aiypj-4331-M] (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sundararaman, C.A (Erode) &For Respondent: Shri. Bipin C.N, CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(1)(i)

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 ... death of assessee. We also note that the revenue did not take any step u/s 159 of the Act to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased assessee. 5. The Hon’ble High Court judgment in the case of Smt. MadhubenKantilal Patel

Late Gurmukh Singh Bali, Through His Legal Representative Raghubir Singh Bali, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi, Delhi

ITA 848/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 2(29)

MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 840 & 848/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Late Gurmukh Singh Bali, | Vs. | ACIT, through legal representative Circle-54(1), Raghubir Singh Bali, New Delhi A-61, Lok Vihar, Pritampura, New Delhi PAN: AAFPB6283K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ashok Goyal ... Case files perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that the appellant herein Sh. Raghubir Singh Bali claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee Late Gurmukh Singh Bali who has been proceeded ex-parte in both the lower proceedings. Learned counsel’s case therefore

Late Gurmukh Singh Bali, Through His Legal Representative Raghubir Singh Bali, New Delhi, Delhi vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 54(1), New Delhi, Delhi

ITA 840/DEL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 2(29)

MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 840 & 848/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Late Gurmukh Singh Bali, | Vs. | ACIT, through legal representative Circle-54(1), Raghubir Singh Bali, New Delhi A-61, Lok Vihar, Pritampura, New Delhi PAN: AAFPB6283K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Ashok Goyal ... Case files perused. 2. It transpires during the course of hearing that the appellant herein Sh. Raghubir Singh Bali claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee Late Gurmukh Singh Bali who has been proceeded ex-parte in both the lower proceedings. Learned counsel’s case therefore

Gopi Nath Mehndiratta Through Legal Heir Kaushalya Devi, Punjabi Bagh vs. Income Tax Officer - Ward 45(7), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed subject to all just exceptions

ITA 3120/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gopi Nath Mehndiratta Through Legal Heir Ward-45(7), Kaushalya Devi, Delhi House No. 30, Road No. 61, West Punjabi Bagh, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi Pan: Aalpm1548C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Shivam Malik, Adv. Department By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr

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

parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the appellant herein, namely, Smt. Kaushalya Devi claims herself to be legal representative of the deceased assessee Late Sh. Gopi Nath Mehndiratta. Learned counsel has filed assessee’s application for her substitution as the deceased assessee ... possession nor in control of any of the estate of the deceased assessee so as to satisfy the relevant criteria of a “legal” representative under section 2(29) of the Act r.w.s. 2(12)(A) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The department has also not proceeded against