GITESH CHANDULAL PATEL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE HASUMATIBEN CHANDUBHAI PATEL,MEHSANA V. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

ITA 656/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Gitesh Chandulal Patel, the legal heir of the late Hasumatiben Chandubhai Patel, against an order by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad-3. The order was issued under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, revising an earlier assessment for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The original assessment had been completed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana, who had assessed the total income at Rs.6,00,620 against the returned income of Rs.3,98,620. The PCIT's revisionary order was challenged on several grounds, including the issuance of the order in the name of a deceased individual and the claim that the reassessment was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474049 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DURG A DUTT
• Assessee Lawyers: DHRUNAL BHATT
• Keywords: Revision of order
• Section: 147; 142(1); 263

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 656/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Gitesh Chandulal Patel, (Legal Heir of late Hasumatiben Chandubhai Patel) Mulki Bhavan, Nr. Bus Stand, Mehsana, Gujarat-384001 Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-3, Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, AR Respondent by: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 28.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 29.11.2024 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT : 1. This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad-3 (hereinafter referred to as \"PCIT\" for short), dated 06.02.2024 in exercise of his revisionary powers under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017- 18. 2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the impugned order u/s. 263 passed by the Ld. PCIT-3 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 1.1 In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Ld. PCIT has been issued in the name of the deceased person, even when the fact of the death of the appellant was already in ITA No. 656/Ahd/2024 Gitesh C Patel Lh of Hasumatiben C Patel Vs. PCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– the knowledge of the department. Hence, the order passed by the Ld. PCIT is invalid and bad in law and thus, deserves to be quashed. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the PCIT-3, Ahmedabad has erred in setting aside the re-assessment order dated 26.03.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer without considering the fact that the Assessing officer during the course of Assessment proceedings has already gone through same issue regarding unexplained cash deposits amounting to Rs.2,02,000/ and after satisfying himself with respect to the details submitted by the appellant company, the Ld. Assessing officer has passed the order under section 147 of the Act. Hence such reassessment order cannot be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the PCIT-3, Ahmedabad has erred in arriving at a conclusion without any basis whatsoever to the effect that the re-assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 4. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. PCIT has grossly erred in directing the AO to pass a fresh assessment order holding that the reassessment order was passed without examining facts of the case and on that ground, invoking provisions of Section-263 of the Income Tax Act. 5. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, the PCIT-3, Ahmedabad has failed to appreciate that the twin conditions for assuming jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act are not satisfied in the case of appellant company as issue which has been relied upon for passing the order u/s. 263 does not show any error or prejudice to the interest of the revenue. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. The assessment order in the case of the assessee has been passed by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Mehsana u/s 147 of the Act on 26.03.2022 ITA No. 656/Ahd/2024 Gitesh C Patel Lh of Hasumatiben C Patel Vs. PCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– determining total income at Rs.6,00,620/- against the returned income of Rs.3,98,620/- . Paragraph No.2 of the assessment order reads as under:- “2. Therefore, a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 12.11.2021 has been issued to the assessee and requesting him to furnish details in his case. Therefore, a reply has been received on 25.12.2021 and submitted that assessee had passed away on 30.05.2021. Thereafter, the case has been pushed back by NeFAC to the JAO on 11.03.2022 to complete the assessment. The notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 12.03.2022 has been issued to legal heir/representative of the assessee as per provisions u/s. 159 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as the assessee has passed away only after the proceedings were initiated. The objections filed by the assessee have been disposed of vide the notice dated 12.03.2022 and requested the assessee to furnish the required details/documents. The assessee has requested to provide the details and sources of cash deposit made during the demonetization period and other cash deposits.” 4. The Ld. PCIT has passed an order dated 06.02.2022 u/s 263 of the Act setting aside the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward-1, Mehsana. 5. The relevant factors considered for adjudication of this case are that:- • The Assessing Officer at paragraph no.2 clearly mentioned that the assessee has passed away after the proceedings were initiated; • Thus, it is a matter on record that the assessee has expired before completion of the assessment; • The assessee has filed Death Certificate before the Assessing Officer indicating that the assessee has expired on 30.05.2021; • In spite of having the relevant information on record, the Ld. PCIT has passed an order on 06.02.2024 in the name of the assessee who has been since expired. ITA No. 656/Ahd/2024 Gitesh C Patel Lh of Hasumatiben C Patel Vs. PCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 4– 6. Keeping in view the facts, we have no hesitation to hold that the ld. PCIT has miserably failed in passing a valid order u/s 263 of the Act. 7. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.11.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 29/11/2024 btk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ\rेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b\tथ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड\u001f फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation …28.11.2024….. 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …28.11.2024 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S ……28.11.2024………. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement …29.11.24.. 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S …29.11.2024………………. 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk ……29.11.2024….…. 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "