Case Law Details

Case Name : Late Smt. Shureshtha Bagga Vs. Income Tax Officer (ITAT Delhi)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 5292/Del./2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 22/02/2018
Related Assessment Year : 2009-10
Courts : All ITAT (7779) ITAT Delhi (1845)

Late Smt. Shureshtha Bagga Vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)

A perusal of para 3.6 of the assessment order shows that the assessee had expired on 25.10.2011 and the Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings taking the legal heirs of the assessee on record. The legal heir aggrieved by the order filed an appeal before the CIT (Appeals). In the proceedings before the First Appellate Authority the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the appeal filed manually had to be filed electronically which despite opportunity was held to have not been complied with or explained.

Held by ITAT

The CIT(A) is directed to first address the claim of the assessee namely that the online platform itself was not permitting the assessee to register as a legal heir in order to e-file the appeal, thus the assessee cannot be penalized for non compliances which are a result of limitations of the platform provided. No doubt the procedures are necessarily required to be adhered to however where the platform itself does not facilitate entry to a legal heir the dismissal of its appeal manually filed cannot be said to be in accordance with law. The impugned order accordingly in view of the above reasons is set aside back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to address the issues and pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee the reasonable opportunity of being heard. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself.

FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 01.06.2017 of CIT (Appeals) -20, New Delhi pertaining 2009-2010 assessment year on various grounds wherein the challenge is posed on the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer as well as on the merits of the addition made but the parties heard only on grounds No. 1 to 3 as the impugned order has been passed without hearing the assessee. The relevant grounds read as under :-

1. That the order passed by CIT (A) u/s 250 (6) of the Act dated 01.06.2017 dismissing the appeal of the assessee is illegal, bad in law and liable to be set aside as the same has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as the appellant was not given any adequate opportunity of hearing before passing of the said order.

2. That the CIT (A) has erred in law by dismissing the appeal of the assessee merely because the was filed manually when the same had been accepted and allotted an appeal number, i.e. Appeal No. 247/2016-17 and therefore the same should have been decide on merits.

3. The CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the appeal of the assessee, Late Smt. Shurestha Bagga, was filed manually legal heir of the assessee could not register herself on Income Tax site

3. Both the parties were heard. The facts on record are that the assessee filed its return on 31.07.2009 which resulted in an order u/s 143 (3) dated 26.12.2011 wherein the returned income was accepted. Subsequently the order dated 27.12.2016 u/s 147/143 (3) of the Income Tax Act was passed resulting in certain additions on account of rejection of assessees Claim Act u/s 54 F of the Income Tax Act 1961. A perusal of para 3.6 of the assessment order shows that the assessee had expired on 25.10.2011 and the Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings taking the legal heirs of the assessee on record. The legal heir aggrieved by the order filed an appeal before the CIT (Appeals). In the proceedings before the First Appellate Authority the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the appeal filed manually had to be filed electronically which despite opportunity was held to have not been complied with or explained. The CIT(A) referring to circular No. 20/26 dated 26.05.2016 dismissed the appeal as no explanation was offered on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. AR has stated that the facts have been incorrectly appreciated by the CIT-(Appeals) as return was also manually filed thus in terms of the circular there was no requirement in these circumstances for the assessee to e-file the appeal. The Id. CIT-DR though placed reliance on the order was unable to address the same. It is noticed that since, full facts are not readily available on record thus at this stage without getting into the debate about the correctness of the claims we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order back to the file of the CIT (Appeals). The CIT(A) is directed to first address the claim of the assessee namely that the online platform itself was not permitting the assessee to register as a legal heir in order to e-file the appeal, thus the assessee cannot be penalized for non compliances which are a result of limitations of the platform provided. No doubt the procedures are necessarily required to be adhered to however where the platform itself does not facilitate entry to a legal heir the dismissal of its appeal manually filed cannot be said to be in accordance with law. The impugned order accordingly in view of the above reasons is set aside back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to address the issues and pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee the reasonable opportunity of being heard. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court at the time of hearing itself.

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

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

3 Comments

  1. Atul Maheshwari says:

    Assessee A expired in 2012
    Notice issued u/ s 148 for a y 2011-12
    Not attended
    AO was informed in writing that A had expired and copy of death certificate was provided
    AO passed an order in the name of A making an addition of 3 lacs and raised a demand and initiated 271(1)(c) penalty
    Son of A filed an application for rectification of order u/s 143 and dropping of penalty u/s 2771(1)(c)
    AO has rejected the rectification application for revising the order u/s 143 but dropped penalty proceedings initiated
    How to proceed further for cancellation of demand in the name of the deceased
    Cannot file online appeal as system does not permit to create a legal heir account . They have infact suggested to create a pan in the name of estate of deceased. This pan is to be applied manually and would take a lot of time and dead line for filing appeal is approaching in 4 days
    Even if we file appeal after obtaining new pan and seeking Condonation of delay how will the demand in another pan will be settled

    Please guide asap

  2. MONIKA JAIN says:

    Dear Sir,
    I have a party X who is individual and he is deceased. Part Y is the legal heir of party X. now party Y is also deceased. now I have received a notice for e filing of an appeal for party X. now you help me that how can we file Electronic appeal of party X.

    1. Mayur Agarwal says:

      In my opinion you will have to assign another legal heir in case of Party X.
      You must have filed the case till now. In case still some issue persists you may contact me on mayuragr (at the rate) gmail dot com.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

February 2021
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728