AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This appellant Sh. Nikhil Jain has filed his instant appeal for assessment year 2017-18 against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072627311(1), dated 28.01.2025, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
For the reasons stated in the appellant’s condonation petition attributing delay for 80 days to the circumstances beyond its control, we quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) to condone the delay.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that there arises the first and foremost issue of the impugned assessment itself initiated vide his notice dated 17.08.2018 whereas the assessee Smt. Bina Jain had already left for her heavenly abode very well before that on 03.02.2018. Learned Assessing Officer had set into motion the impugned proceedings in the assessee’s case very well after her death only. Faced with this situation, learned CIT(DR) representing Revenue vehemently argues that it was very much incumbent for the deceased assessee’s legal representative(s) to bring her death to the notice of the Assessing Officer.
We find that this instant issue is no more res integra in light of Savita Kapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 46 (Delhi) having already decided in the appellant’s favour and against the department that any such proceedings initiated after the assessee’s demise, are not sustainable in law. We accordingly quash the impugned reopening in very terms.
This appellant’s appeal is allowed.