Shri Janak V.Patel, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT, Cent.Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 106/AHD/2005

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9510 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 20-11-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2005
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K C MATHEWS SRDR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit

Judgement Text

, , , , , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH D BENCH, AHMEDABAD .., ! '# '# '# '# $ %&, ! BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER (SS) #./ I.T(SS).A. NO.106/AHD/2005 (BLOCK PERIOD 1/4/95 TO 31/3/2001 & 1/4/01 TO 13/12 /2001) SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL 10, SULAY APARTMENT NR.NEELKANTH MAHADEV TEMPLE OPP.SUN & STEP CLUB THALTEJ, AHMEDABAD / VS. THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) AHMEDABAD !( #./)* #./ PAN/GIR NO. : AJKPP 3113G ( (+ / // / APPELLANT ) .. ( ,-(+ / RESPONDENT ) (+ . / APPELLANT BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, AR ,-(+ / . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KC MATHEWS, SR.DR $'0 / & / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 20/11/2013 123 / & / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/11/2013 4 / O R D E R PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-I, AHMEDABAD (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 21/12/2004 PERTAINING TO BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12.2001. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 2 - GROUNDS OF APPEAL ASSESSMENT YEAR- BLOCK PERIOD 1/4 /1995 TO 31/3/2001 & 1/4/2001 TO 13/12/2001 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 9,73,000 CASH DEPOSIT ED IN BANK ACCOUNT WITHOUT APPRECIATING SOURCE OF INCOME I.E. AGRICULTURAL INC OME AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ACCOUNTS OF APPELLANT FROM 'SHIVAM FARM' IN WHICH THE APPELLANT IS A CO-OWNER. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) - I HAS ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING POINTS REGARDING AN AGRICULTURAL IN COME AND CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK IN REGULAR ASSESSMENT VIS-A-VIS BLOCK ASSESSME NT AS IT IS SETTLED BY VARIOUS COURTS WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THAT BOTH ASSESSME NTS ARE SEPARATE AND DISTINCT. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 3,95,000 SO CALLED IN VESTMENT MADE IN UNIT NO. A-1, RADHIKA BUNGALOW WITHOUT APPRECIATING FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND PROVISION OF SECTION 132(4A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 81,000 SO CALLED INVE STMENT MADE IN SHIVSHAKTI CONSULTANCY PVT. LTD. WITHOUT APPRECIATING FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF PREPARATION OF THREE RECEIPTS FOUND FROM VAIKUNTH P REMISES AND APPLICATION OF PROVISION OF SECTION 132(4A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CON FIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 4,80,000 AS UNACCOUNTED CASH CREDITS FROM VARIOUS P ARTIES, AS THE ASSESSEE NEVER RECEIVED SAID CASH CREDIT AND THERE WAS NO EV IDENCE OF RECEIPT OF CASH CREDIT. 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,47,000 AS INTER EST ON FICTITIOUS INVESTMENT WORKED OUT ON ANNEXURE A-20 PAGE NO. 99 FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF RADHIKA BUNGALOWS I.E. THIRD PARTY. 7. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,92,000 FICTITIO US INVESTMENT WORK OUT ON THE BASIC OF ANNEXURE A-30 PAGE NO. 99 FOUND FROM T HE PREMISES OF RADHIKA BUNGALOW I.E. THIRD PARTY. 8. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 76,300 SO CALLED RENT INCOME IN THE NAMES OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT ESTABLISHING OWNERSHIP OF PROP ERTIES RENTED AND WITHOUT PROPER CONSIDERATION OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 9. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - I IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 46,610 RETURNED INCO ME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON INCORRECT INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 158B B(1)(C )(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 10. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I HAS ERRED IN DECIDING THAT VARIOUS JUDGMENT QUOTED IN ASSESSMENT ORDER CIT V/S. K K ABDUL KARIM 88 TAXMAN 323 (KERALA), R BHARTHAN V/S. ITO 182 ITR 146 IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 3 - (KERALA), SODHI TRANSPORT COMPANY V/S. STATE OF UTT AR PRADESH AIR 1986 (SUPREME COURT) PAGE NO. 1099-1106 AND STATE OF M. P. V/S. BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS 106 STC 604, 608 (SUPREME COURT) WERE A PPLICABLE TO FACTS OF THE CASE WITHOUT MENTIONING SPEAKING WORDS AND REASONS FOR ITS APPLICABILITY. 11. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) - I HAS ERRED IN DECIDING THAT VARIOUS ASSUMPTION AND PRESUMPTION DR AWN BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER IN SECTION 132(4A) ETC HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY DRAWN AND CORRECTLY APPLIED TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE MENTIONE D IN VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEALS. 12. YOUR APPELLANT PRAYS TO ADD, ALTER OR DELE TE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT A SEARCH ACTION U/ S.132 OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON THE ASSESSEE (SHRI JANK V.PATEL) ALONG WITH THE SHREEJI GROUP ON 13.12.2001 THE ASSESSEE U/S.158BC R.W.S.1 43(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) WAS FRAMED AND THE ASSESSEE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL FEELING AGGRIEVED BY TH E ORDER, PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT, PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL. IT WAS INTIMATED VID E LETTER DATED 22/02/2010 BY SHRI P.M.PATEL & CO., CAS THAT SHRI J ANAK V.PATEL EXPIRED AND HIS WIFE RESIDED ALONGWITH HER KIDS IN LONDON AND HE INFORMED THAT HE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO GIVE DETAI LS OF THE OTHER LEGAL HEIR/LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DECEASED-ASSESSEE. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE WAS SERVED UPON TO SMT.ANITA JANK PATEL, WIDOW OF L ATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, SHRI TUSH AR HEMANI APPEARED AND FILED HIS LETTER OF AUTHORITY ON BEHALF OF SMT.ANIT A JANAK PATEL. AN AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF SMT.ANITA J.PATEL DULY NOTAR IZED BY NOTARY SHRI N.A.SEVAK, GOVT.OF INDIA HAVING REG.NO.2077. IN TH E AFFIDAVIT, SMT.ANITA JANAK PATEL STATED THAT SHE IS NEITHER A LEGAL HEIR NOR A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED APPELL ANT. THEREFORE, SHE IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 4 - CANNOT BE ARRAYED AS ONE OF THE PARTIES IN THE APPE LLATE PROCEEDINGS. SMT. ANITA J.PATEL HAS FURNISHED A SYNOPSIS THROUGH ADVO CATE SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI, WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: SYNOPSIS OF THE ARGUMENTS MRS. ANITA JANAK PATEL, WIDOW OF LATE JANAK V . PATEL, HAS BEEN CHOSEN AS A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF HER HUSBAND BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. SHE IS NEITHER A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE NOR A LEGAL HEIR OF LATE JANAK V. PATEL. DETAILED REASONS FOR THE SAME HAVE STATED BY MRS. ANITA JANAK PATEL VIDE HER AFFIDAVIT DATED 28/01/13 WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN PLACED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. AS PER S.159 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, 'LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE' OF THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE LIABLE FOR THE DUES OF SUCH DECEASED ASSESSEE. THE TERM US ED UNDER THE ACT IS 'LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE' AND NOT 'LEGAL HEIR'. AS PER S.159 R.W.S. 2(29) OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961 R.W.S. 2(11) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, 'LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE' MEANS A PERSON WHO IN LAW RE PRESENTS THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSON, AND INCLUDES ANY PERSON WHO INTERMEDDLES WITH THE E STATE OF THE DECEASED AND WHERE A PARTY SUES OR IS SUED IN A REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER THE PERSON ON WH OM THE ESTATE DEVOLVES ON THE DEATH OF THE PARTY SO SUING OR SUED. A PERSON AUTOMATICALLY BECOMES 'LEGAL HEIR' B Y VIRTUE OF HIS/HER RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DECEASED WHEREAS A PERSON BECOMES 'LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE' ONL Y AFTER FOLLOWING THE PRESCRIBED PROCEDURE UNDER THE LAW. A PERSON CANNOT BE TREATED AS A LEGAL REPR ESENTATIVE AUTOMATICALLY. AS PER RULE 26 OF THE ITAT RULES, 1963, THE CONCERNED LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE MUST COME FORWAR D AND MOVE AN APPLICATION TO THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL REQ UESTING TO BRING HIM ON RECORDS. UNLESS SUCH AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED, THIS HON'BLE ITAT, ON I TS OWN MOTION, CANNOT TREAT ANY PERSON AS A LEGAL HEIR OF THE DECEASED ASSESSEE. MRS. ANITA JANAK PATEL HAS NOT MOVED ANY SUCH APPLICATION. SINCE THE PROCEDURE PRESCRIBED VIDE THE ITAT RULES HAS NOT BEEN FOLLOWED, ACTION OF TRE ATING MRS. ANITA JANAK PATEL AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE IS NOT TENABLE IN THE EYE OF LAW. FURTHER, EVEN IF THE NOTICE IS TO BE ISSUED T O THE LEGAL HEIR AND NOT LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE, THE SAME HAS TO BE ISSUED TO ALL THE LEGAL HEIRS AND A PARTI CULAR LEGAL HEIR CANNOT BE SINGLED OUT. S. 8 AND 9 OF THE THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 READ: S.8 - GENERAL RULES OF SUCCESSION IN THE CASE OF MA LES. THE PROPERTY OF A MALE HINDU DYING INTESTATE SHALL DEVOLVE ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER:- A) FIRSTLY, UPON THE HEIRS, BEING THE RELATIVES SP ECIFIED IN CLASS I OF THE SCHEDULE; B) SECONDLY, IF THERE IS NO HEIR OF CLASS I, THEN U PON THE HEIRS, BEING THE RELATIVES SPECIFIED IN CLA SS II OF THE SCHEDULE; C) THIRDLY, IF THERE IS NO HEIR OF ANY OF THE TWO CLASSES, THEN UPON THE AGNATES OF THE DECEASED; AND D) LASTLY, IF THERE IS NO AGNATE, THEN UPON THE COG NATES OF THE DECEASED. S.9- ORDER OF SUCCESSION AMONG HEIRS IN THE SCHEDUL E. AMONG THE HEIRS SPECIFIED IN THE SCHEDULE, THOSE IN CLASS I SHALL TAKE SIMULTANEOUSLY AND TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER HEIRS; THOSE IN THE FIRST EN TRY IN CLASS II SHALL BE PREFERRED TO THOSE IN THE SECOND ENTRY; THOSE IN THE SECOND ENTRY SHALL BE PREFERRED TO THOSE IN THE THIRD ENTRY; AND SO ON IN SUCCESSI ON. THE SCHEDULE HEIRS IN CLASS I AND CLASS II CLASS I SON, DAUGHTER, WIDOW, MOTHER, SON OF A PRE-DECEASED SON, DAUGHTER OF A PREDECEASED SON, SON OF A PRE- DECEASED DAUGHTER, DAUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEASED DAUGH TER, WIDOW OF A PRE-DECEASED SON, SON OF PRE- DECEASED SON OF A PRE-DECEASED SON, DAUGHTER OF A P RE-DECEASED SON OF A PRE-DECEASED SON, WIDOW OF A PREDECEASED SON OF A PRE-DECEASED SON, SON OF A PRE -DECEASED DAUGHTER OF A PREDECEASED DAUGHTER; IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 5 - DAUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEASED DAUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEAS ED DAUGHTER; DAUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEASED SON OF A PRE-DECEASED DAUGHTER; DAUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEASED D AUGHTER OF A PRE-DECEASED SON. CLASS II I. FATHER //. (1) SON'S DAUGHTER'S SON (2) SON'S DAUGHTER'S D AUGHTER, (3) BROTHER, (4) SISTER. ///. (1) DAUGHTER'S SON'S SON, (2) DAUGHTER'S SON 'S DAUGHTER , (3) DAUGHTER'S DAUGHTER'S SON, (4) D AUGHTER'S DAUGHTER'S DAUGHTER. IV. (1) BROTHER'S SON (2) SISTER'S SON, (3) BROTHER 'S DAUGHTER (4) SISTER'S DAUGHTER. V. FATHER'S FATHER, FATHER'S MOTHER. VI. FATHER'S WIDOW, BROTHER'S WIDOW. VII FATHER'S BROTHER, FATHER'S SISTER. VIII MOTHER 'S FATHER, MOTHER'S SISTER. IX MOTHER'S BROTHER, MOTHER'S SISTER. EXPLANATION.- IN THIS SCHEDULE, REFERENCES TO A BRO THER OR SISTER DO NOT INCLUDE REFERENCES TO A BROTH ER OR SISTER BY UTERINE BLOOD. 'WIDOW' FALLS IN PERSONS SPECIFIED CLASS I. AS PER S.9 OF THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956, ALL T HE PERSONS SPECIFIED IN CLASS I ARE TO BE TREATED AT P AR AND THEY ARE SIMULTANEOUS HEIRS. HENCE, WHILE ISSUING THE NOTICE, NO SPECIAL TREATMENT CAN BE GRA NTED TO THE 'WIDOW' TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHERS WHIL E DETERMINING AS TO WHO IS THE 'LEGAL HEIR'. IT IS NO T OPEN TO APPLY THE PICK AND CHOOSE METHOD AND TREA T ANY ONE OF THE SPECIFIED PERSONS AS THE LEGAL HEIR. THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AND DEPARTMENT OUGHT TO HAVE ISSUED NOTICE ON ALL THE REPRESENTATIVES AS SP ECIFIED IN CLASS I. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON DECISION OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF 'MRS. SUSEELA SADANANDAN AND ANOTHER - 59 ITR168 (SC). IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, MRS. ANITA JANAK PATEL CAN'T BE CONSIDERED AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LAT E JANAK V. PATEL. SD/- TUSHAR HEMANI ADVOCATE 2.1. ON THE CONTRARY, LD.SR.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW AS WELL AS THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR SMT.ANITA J.PATEL. BY A CONJOINT READING OF SECTIO N 159 R.W.S. 2(29) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 R.W.S.2(11) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL P ROCEDURE, 1908, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE MEANS A PERSON WHO IN LAW REPRESENT S THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSONS, AND INCLUDES ANY PERSON WHO INTER MEDDLES WITH THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED AND WHERE A PARTY SUES OR IS SUED IN A REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER THE PERSON ON WHOM THE EST ATE DEVOLVES ON THE DEATH OF THE PARTY SO SUING OR SUED. SMT.ANITA J.P ATEL HAS STATED IN THE IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 6 - AFFIDAVIT THAT SHE IS NOT THE LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SH RI JANAK V.PATEL AS SHE WAS NEVER A PART OF THE FAMILY OF HER IN-LAWS AND H E WAS COMPELLED TO LEAVE THE HOUSE WITH HER MINOR DAUGHTER IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE DEMISE OF SHRI JANAK V.PATEL. SHE FURTHER STATED THAT NEITHE R LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL KEPT HER NAME IN ANY OF HIS MOVABLE OR IMMOVABLE PR OPERTY NOR HER IN- LAWS GAVE HER ANYTHING FROM HIS ESTATE. SHE FURTHE R STATED THAT SHE HAS NOT RECEIVED A SINGLE PAISA FROM THE ESTATE OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL. SHE ALSO STATED THAT SHE HAS NOT INHERITED ANY ASSET OR PROPERTY FROM HIS ESTATE. THE REVENUE HAS NOT PLACED ANYTHING ON RECORD SUGGE STING THAT SMT.ANITA J.PATEL WIDOW OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL REPRESENTED THE ESTATE OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL OR HAS RECEIVED A NY BENEFIT OR WOULD RECEIVE ANY SHARE FROM THE MOVABLE OR IMMOVABLE PRO PERTY OF HER DECEASED HUSBAND. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CON SIDERATION TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE COUNSEL FOR SMT.ANITA J.PAT EL. UNDISPUTEDLY, AS PER SECTION 159 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WHERE A PERSON DIES, HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY ANY SUM WHICH THE DECEASED WOULD HAVE BEEN LIABLE TO PAY IF HE HAD NOT DIED, I N THE LIKE MANNER AND TO THE SAME EXTENT AS THE DECEASED. AS PER SECTION 2(29) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS THE MEANIN G ASSIGNED TO IT IN CLAUSE (11) OF SECTION 2 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCE DURE, 1908 (5 OF 1908). AS PER SECTION 2(11) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDUR E, 1908, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE MEANS A PERSON WHO IN LAW REPRESENT S THE ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSON, AND INCLUDES ANY PERSON WHO INTERM EDDLES WITH THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED AND WHERE A PARTY SUES OR IS SUED IN A REPRESENTATIVE CHARACTER THE PERSON ON WHOM THE EST ATE DEVOLVES ON THE DEATH OF THE PARTY SO SUING OR SUED. IN THE INSTAN T CASE, SMT.ANITA J.PATEL IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 7 - WIDOW OF LATE SHRI JANK V.PATEL IS A CLASS-I LEGAL HEIR AS PER HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1957. HOWEVER, NO EVIDENCE IS PLAC ED ON RECORD DEMONSTRATING THAT ANY MOVABLE OR IMMOVABLE PROPERT Y OF LATE SHRI JANK V.PATEL IS DEVOLVED UPON BY SMT.ANITA J.PATEL. I N THE ABSENCE OF THE SAME AND IN VIEW OF A CATEGORICAL STATEMENT BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT MADE BY SMT.ANITA J.PATEL THAT SHE IS NEITHER A LEGAL HEIR OF ANY PROPERTY BELONGING TO LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL NOR A LEGAL RE PRESENTATIVE OF ESTATE OF DECEASED APPELLANT, SHE CANNOT BE TREATED AS A LEGA L HEIR/REPRESENTATIVE OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL. MOREOVER, NO OTHER LEGAL HEIR OR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD. HOWEVER, IT IS CLARIFIED THAT THE REVENUE SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROCEED IN TERM S OF SECTION 159 OF THE IT ACT QUA THE PROPERTIES BOTH MOVABLE AND IMMOVABL E BELONGING TO LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL INHERITED OR REPRESENTED BY SMT. ANITA J.PATEL WIDOW OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTAN CES, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS HEREBY DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT HAD EXPIRED DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPEAL AND NO OTHER LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD EXCEPT SMT. ANITA J.PATEL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED HER EINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ($ %&) ! ! ( N.S. SAINI ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.106/ AHD/2005 SMT.ANITA J.PATEL L/H OF LATE SHRI JANAK V.PATEL VS. ACIT BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.95 TO 31.3.01 & 1.4.01 TO 13.12 .01 - 8 - AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/11/2013 7.., '.../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS 4 / ,&8 983& 4 / ,&8 983& 4 / ,&8 983& 4 / ,&8 983&/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. (+ / THE APPELLANT 2. ,-(+ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ## & $: / CONCERNED CIT 4. $:() / THE CIT(A)-I, AHMEDABAD 5. 8'%; ,& , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. ;< =0 / GUARD FILE. 4$ 4$ 4$ 4$ / BY ORDER, -8& ,& //TRUE COPY// > >> >/ // / #) #) #) #) ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 20.11.13(DICTATION-PAD 14-PAG ES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 20.11.13 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH FAIR ORDER PLACED BEFORE OTHER MEMBER 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.22.11.13 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 22.11.13 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER