SH. INDER SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH L/H SMT. SWARAN KAUR,YAMUNA NAGAR V. ITO, WARD-5, YAMUNA NAGAR

ITA 94/CHANDI/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Smt. Swaran Kaur, the legal heir of the deceased Shri Inder Singh, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which confirmed the additions made by the AO for unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the deceased. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, noting that the legal heir failed to provide adequate explanation or documentation regarding the source of the deposits. The Tribunal also addressed procedural issues, such as the delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned based on the reasonable cause shown by the appellant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772267 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: VIBHUTI THAKUR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 94/CHD/2023 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Inder Singh (Deceased) Through L.H. Smt. Swaran Kaur, Village – Fazalpur, PO-Sadaura, Teh-Jagadhari, Distt.Yamuna Nagar. Vs The ITO, Ward – 5, Yamuna Nagar. èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: CXXPS1419P अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Vibhuti Thakur, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 12.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.08.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 19.09.2022 passed for assessment year 2011-12. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 95 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed an application submitting therein that her C.A. Shri Amit Sharma did not Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.94/CHD/2023 A.Y.2011-12 2 communicate the impugned order well in time and because of that, the appeal could not be filed. 3. After going through the affidavit of Smt. Swaran Kaur, widow of late Shri Inder Singh and the explanation filed by the assessee, we are satisfied that assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing the appeal well in time. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to decide it on merit. 4. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal but her grievance revolves around two-fold of issues, namely; (a) The ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte, and (b) The ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.50,67,000/- and Rs.6,292/- which were added by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account. 5. The brief facts of the case are that assessee did not file his return of income. An information has been received by the AO from AIR Information Report Wing exhibiting that a sum of Rs.66,36,000/- has been deposited in cash with State Bank of India. The AO has recorded reasons that income has escaped Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.94/CHD/2023 A.Y.2011-12 3 assessment and accordingly, issued notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. 6. During the course of hearing, Shri Amarjeet Singh, CA appeared on behalf of assessee and submitted that two pieces of land was sold and assessee has received a sum of Rs.15,69,000/-. The AO has given credit of this amount against the alleged cash deposits in the bank and accordingly, made addition of the balance i.e. Rs.50,67,000/-. 7. Appeal to the ld.CIT (Appeals) did not bring any relief to the assessee. Though CIT (Appeals) has confirmed the addition by way of an ex-parte order because no one has appeared on behalf of assessee in response to the notice. Even before the AO, assessee has not appeared initially and ultimately, AO has to issue a notice for imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for non-compliance of the notice. The ld. counsel for the assessee appeared thereafter only. However, we have permitted the ld. counsel for the assessee to argue on merits. We have invited attention to show us the source from where these deposits have been made. She has only apprised us that two pieces of land were sold but credit of those Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.94/CHD/2023 A.Y.2011-12 4 amounts have already been given by the AO. When we put this question again, then she said that since Shri Inder Singh has died long back, therefore, she could only tell what was the source. The Legal Heir does not have any information. She expressed her inability for explaining the source of such deposits before us. She only pointed out that notice u/s 147 was issued on a deceased person, but this argument is not tenable because such notice was issued on the Legal Heir of the deceased and it was incumbent upon the Legal Heir to inform the AO about death of Shri Inder Singh. The assessee, Shri Inder Singh was non-filer of the return, thus it was the duty of the Legal Heir to inform the Income Tax Department that Shri Inder Singh has died. It is also to be noted that Legal Heirs could have filed his return after his death and discharge the tax liability, if any, but no such steps have been taken by them. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this alternative argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee. 8. Before parting with this order, we would observe that Section 159 sub-clause (4) contemplates that Legal Heir will be able to discharge the tax liability of the deceased to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.94/CHD/2023 A.Y.2011-12 5 extent they have inherited the asset of the deceased. In case, nothing has been inherited by the Legal Heirs, then no tax liability could be fastened upon them. Therefore, we direct the AO to first determine whether any asset has been inherited by the Legal Heirs or not and only thereafter, work out the tax liability for recovery. 9. With the above observation, this appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced on 27.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT a. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "