Kapur Chand Bansal Through Legal Heir Ajay Bansal vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(2)

This assessee’s/alleged legal heir’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080328471(1) dated 04.09.2025, in proceedings u/s 144of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Delay of 59 days in the filing of the instant appeal is condoned, going by the assessee’s contention/averments which has not been un-rebutted from the Revenue’s side.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It emerges at the outset that the appellant herein Sh. Ajay Bansal, claims himself to be the legal representative of the deceased assessee Sh. Kapur Chand Bansal. Learned counsel submits that since the appellant happens to be the son of the deceased assessee, he is entitled to file the instant appeal as his legal representative.

I have given m y thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s foregoing arguments regarding maintainabilit y of his instant appeal. It is made clear that neither she has proved to have satisfied the relevant statutory condition 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 father or he is the intermeddler thereof nor any action is stated to have been initiated against her u/s 159 of the Act. That being the case, the tribunal hereby rejects the appellant’s instant appeal for the very precise reason at this stage subject 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 accordingl y.

This appellant’s appeal is dismissed as pre-mature in above terms.