ANKUSH MEHTA,NAVI MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD -2, SOLAN (H.P), SOLAN

ITA 919/PUN/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Ankush Mehta against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which upheld the disallowance of a House Rent Allowance (HRA) deduction claimed in the income tax return for the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was initially filed in Pune but later transferred to the ITAT Chandigarh. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and his counsel informed the Tribunal about the demise of the assessee and the untraceability of his legal heirs. The Tribunal decided the appeal based on the available records, which showed that the assessee had not provided any evidence to support the HRA deduction claim.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315953 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च\u0010डीगढ़ \u0014यायपीठ, च\u0010डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 919/PUN/2019 नधा\u0011रण वष\u0011 / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Ankush Mehta, B-508, Merdian CHS, Plot No. 25 & 26, Sector 6, Neral, Navi Mumbai. Vs The ITO, Ward – 2, Solan (HP). \u0016थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AILPM3306J अपीलाथ\u001a/Appellant \u001b यथ\u001a/Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 08.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 14.05.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 22.01.2019 passed for assessment year 2011-12. 2. This appeal was originally filed at Pune Benches. Later on, it has been transferred to ITAT Chandigarh by the Hon'ble President on the request of the assessee. ITA No.919/PUN/2019 A.Y.2011-12 2 3. In response to notice of hearing, no one has come present on behalf of the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has sent a letter through e-mail, which read as under : PAN - AILPM3306J Fri, Mar 07,2025 11.10 AM From : [e-mail] To : ITAT, Chandigarh Benches Respected Sir, I, Someshwar Dineshji Aasawa (authorised representative), on behalf of Mr. Ankush Mehta would like to withdraw my appeal before your honor on the demise of my client Mr. Ankush Mehta and the appellant's legal heir are not traceable. Requesting you to please withdraw my appeal. Someshwar Dineshji Aasawa 4. The appeal is on the board since 30.09.2019. It has been adjourned time to time. A perusal of the record would indicate that assessee has filed his return of income on 12.07.2011 declaring total income of Rs.11,53,290/-. The assessee has claimed deduction of HRA amounting to Rs.1,10,882/-. Ld. AO has apprised the assessee to produce documentary evidence for claiming this deduction but assessee did not submit anything. Accordingly, ld. AO has disallowed this claim of the assessee. ITA No.919/PUN/2019 A.Y.2011-12 3 5. Dissatisfied with the above, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but did not prosecute the appeal. The CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs.50,000/- which was added by the AO on earning of estimated interest income but upheld the disallowance of HRA as a deduction. 6. Against this order of the CIT(A), assessee has come up in appeal but failed to submit anything, more so his counsel has apprised us that assessee has died and he does not have any details of the Legal Representatives. Under these compelling circumstances, we have to decide the appeal since assessee could not submit any detail before both the lower authorities demonstrating the fact as to how HRA is admissible to the assessee as deduction. Hence, this addition is upheld. 6.1 The ld. AO is reminded about Section 159 of the Act which contemplates that if any recovery is to be made from the legal heirs, then such recovery could only be made to the extent of assets being inherited by the legal heirs from an assessee. In other words, if any demand is required to ITA No.919/PUN/2019 A.Y.2011-12 4 be recovered from the legal heirs of the assessee, then that should only be enforced against a legal heir who has inherited the property of the assessee. Otherwise demand could not be recovered. Ordered accordingly, 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on 14.05.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u000f/ The Appellant 2. \u0003\u0010यथ\u000f/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u0014/ CIT 4. िवभागीय \u0003ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च\u0018डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar "