Shyam Sunder vs Income Tax Officer

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, [in short, the “Ld. CIT(A/NFAC”], Delhi’s order dated 16.08.2024 passed in case no. CIT(A), Delhi-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024/1067665836(1),involving proceedings under section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee behest is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that there arises the first and foremost legal issue of the validity of the impugned reopening itself herein. This is for the precise reason that the Learned Assessing Officer had issued his section 148 notice dated 30.03.2018 in the assessee’s name whereas the latter had already left for his heavenly abode on 25.12.2014. (Page 30)

This being clinching factual position from the Revenue side, we hereby quote SavitaKapila Vs. ACIT (2020) 118 Taxman.com 46 (Delhi.) to conclude that the impugned reopeningitself isnot sustainable in law since initiated against the deceased assessee. The same stand quashed in very terms therefore.

All other remaining pleadings between the parties on merits stand rendered academic.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed.