AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, De lhi’ s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072727726(1) dated 30.01.2025, in proceed ings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in shor t “the Act”).
Heard both the p arties at length. Case file perused.
Delay of 292 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisitio n vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) .
It emerges at the outset that the appellant claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased asse ssee Sh. Harish Chander Katyal who is stated to have left for his heavenly abode on 29.10 .2025. Learned counsel submits that since the appellant happens to be the wife/spouse of the deceased asse ssee, he is entitled to file the instant appeal as his legal representative.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s foregoing arguments regarding maintainability of his instant appeal. It is made clear that neither he has proved to have satisfied the relevant statutory conditio n defining a legal representative u/s 2(29) of the Act r.w.s. 2(11) of the Code of Civil procedure, 1908 that he represents the estate of his deceased husband/wife or he is the intermeddler thereof nor any actio n is stated to have been initiated against her u/s 159 of the Act. That being the case, the tribunal hereby rejects the applicant instant appeal for the very precise reason at this stage sub ject to a rider that he shall indeed at liberty to take recourse to all his legal remedies once he satisfies either of the foregoing twin conditions i.e. section 2(29) or u/s 159 of the Act; as the case may be, whichever is earlier. Ordered according ly.
This appellant’s appeal is dismissed as pre- mature in above terms.