PRATAP R NAIR,KOLLAM V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM

ITA 370/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves a series of appeals by the legal heir of Sri K. Ravindranathan Nair, proprietor of Vijayalaxmi Cashew Company, against the orders of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, for various assessment years from 2002-2003 to 2008-2009. The primary contention in these appeals was the dismissal of the appeals as non-maintainable by the CIT(A) due to procedural non-compliance by the legal heirs following the death of the original assessee. The Tribunal noted the procedural requirements that needed to be fulfilled by the legal heirs and decided to set aside the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after proper compliance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471650 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJIT KUMAR DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: T.V. HARIHARAN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member & Shri Soundararajan K, Judicial Member ITA No.368/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2002-2003 ITA No.369/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2005-2006 ITA No.370/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2006-2007 ITA No.371/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2007-2008 ITA No.372/Coch/2024 :Asst.Year 2008-2009 Sri.Pratap R Nair (L/R of Late Sri.K.Ravindranathan Nair) Prop: Vijayalaxmi Cashew Company, Kochupilammoodu Kollam – 691 001. PAN :AEJPP9867M. v. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle Kollam. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :Sri.T.V.Hariharan, CA Respondent by :Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 01.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 21.10.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This bunch of five appeals by the assessee arise out of the orders of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, all dated 27.02.2024 in the proceedings u/s143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter. The relevant assessment years are 2002-2003, 2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2008- 2009. 2. Since identical issues are involved in these appeals, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order, for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.368-372/Coch/2024. Sri.PratapR.Nair (L/R of K.Ravindranathan Nair) 2 First, we take up ITA No.368/Coch/2024 for the Asst.Year 2002-03 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as non-maintainable without deciding the issue on merits. 4. At the outset, we note that the assessee has passed away on 08th July 2023 during the pendency of appeal before theld.CIT(A). This fact was very much in the knowledge of the ld.CIT(A). As per the ld.CIT(A), the legal heirs were to file fresh Form No.35 duly signed by them, and similarly, the legal heirs should have been brought on record. But the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee has not done so. Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee as non-maintainable. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee (legal heir) is in appeal before us. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee (legal heir) assured us to make necessary compliance by bringing the legal heir on record as well as filing fresh Form No.35 before the ld. CIT-A and accordingly prayed to set aside the issue to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. 5. On the other hand, the learned DR did not raise any objection if the matter is set aside to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. 6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering ITA Nos.368-372/Coch/2024. Sri.PratapR.Nair (L/R of K.Ravindranathan Nair) 3 the demise of the assessee during the pendency of the appeal before the ld.CIT(A), we are inclined to extend one more opportunity to the assessee (legal heir) to represent his case before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we restore the issue to the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. It is not out of place to direct the assessee (legal heir) to make necessary compliance and avoid prolonging the matter by filing adjournment without just cause. Hence, the ground raised by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. ITA Nos.369 to 372/Coch/2024 : Asst.Years2005-2006 to 2008-2009 7. The issues involved in these appeals and the facts and circumstances are mutatis mutandis similar to that of ITA No.368/Coch/2024 which we have set aside for fresh order of the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, these years as well, are restored to the file of ld. CIT-A for fresh adjudication, in the above terms. 8. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 21st day of October, 2024. Sd/- (Soundararajan K) Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin ; Dated : 21st October, 2024. Devadas G* ITA Nos.368-372/Coch/2024. Sri.PratapR.Nair (L/R of K.Ravindranathan Nair) 4 Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT Concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "