Lt. Hridaya Narayan ,Through L/H Suresh Kumar Yadava(son),, Varanasi v. ITO,, Varanasi

ITA 124/ALLD/2013 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 27-04-2015 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 12420714 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AEQPY6261F
Bench Allahabad
Appeal Number ITA 124/ALLD/2013
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant Lt. Hridaya Narayan ,Through L/H Suresh Kumar Yadava(son),, Varanasi
Respondent ITO,, Varanasi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 27-04-2015
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 27-04-2015
Date Of Final Hearing 24-04-2015
Next Hearing Date 24-04-2015
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 03-05-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI C. N. PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 124 /ALLD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 LATE HRIDAYA NARAYAN THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SURESH KUMAR YADAV (SON) VILLAGE GUNJ SARNATH VARANASI UTTAR PRADESH PAN:-AEQPY6261F VS. ITO RANGE 3(3) VARANASI (APPELLANT) (RESPO NDENT) ITA NO. 126/ALLD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 LATE MUKUND YADAV THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SMT. MUNNI DEVI (WIFE) VILLAGE GUNJ SARNATH VARANASI UTTAR PRADESH PAN:-BINPD6511P VS. ITO RANGE 3(3) VARANASI (APPELLANT) (RESPO NDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SUBHASH CHAND REVENUE BY : SHRI UMESH PATHAK DATE OF HEARING : 24.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.04.2015 O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO AM: THERE ARE TWO APPEALS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR THE COMMON A.Y. 2004-05 AND ARE FILED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) VARANASI DATED 15.03.2013. 2. AT THE OUTSET LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT IN THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER THE LD. COUNSEL ADJUDICATED BOT H THE APPEALS CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. THERE WAS A COMMON ISSUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS AND AT RELATES TO VALIDITY OF THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS QUA THE VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE AO AND SERVED ON INDIVIDUALS WHEN TH E ASSESSEES ALREADY EXPIRED ITA NO. 124 & 126/ALLD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 2 LONG BACK. IN THIS REGARD COUNSEL BROUGHT TO OUR A TTENTION NOTICE U/S 148 PLACED AT PAGE 6/16A OF THE PAPER BOOK AND MENTIONED THE NOTI CE U/S 148 IN THE NAME OF HRADAYA NARAYAN WAS ISSUED ON 23.03.2011. BUT THE F ACT IS SHRI HRADAYA NARAYAN EXPIRED ON 04.02.2011 (PAGE 9 OF THE PAPER BOOK). 3. SIMILARLY SHRI MUKUND YADAV EXPIRED ON 10.12.20 05 AND THE NOTICE U/S 148 WAS DATED 23.03.2011 THUS THERE IS A GAP OF SIX LO NG YEARS. IN THIS CASE MENTIONING THE ABOVE DAYS IN BOTH THE CASES LEARNED COUNSEL S UBMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED NOTICES U/S 148 WERE BAD IN LAW AS THEY BEAR THE NA MES OF THE DECEASED PERSONS. FURTHER HE MENTIONED THAT RE-ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE IN THE NAMES OF THE LEGAL HEIRS WITHOUT BRINGING THEM ON RECORD AND WITHOUT I SSUING IT STATUTORY NOTICES U/S 148 ON THE LEGAL HEIRS. STATING THAT THE IMPUGNED R EASSESSMENT IN BOTH THE CASES ARE NOT VALID. FOR THIS PROPOSITION HE FILED COPIES OF THE JUDGMENTS IN THE CASE OF BRAHMA PRAKASH FROM HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT 190 CT R 191 FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT SUCH REASSESSMENTS MADE WITHOUT ISSUING A NOTICE U/ S 148 ON THE LEGAL HEIRS/LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES BAD IN LAW AND THE ORDERS HAVE TO BE QUASHED BEING IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE FACT SIMILAR LEGAL PROPOSITION WAS FOLLOWED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ALLAHABAD TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF LATE VANSH NARAYAN AND OTHERS ITA NO. 120/ALLD/2013 DATED 28.02.2014 IS PLACED ON RECORD. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE DUTIFU LLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO AND LD. CIT(A). ON THIS LEGAL ISSUE WE PERUSE S UCH JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT WHICH IS RELEVANT IN THE FOLLOWING PROPOSITION:- NOTICE U/S 148 IN PURSUANCE OF WHICH THE ASSESSME NT WAS FRAMED HAVING BEEN ISSUED IN THE NAME OF DECEASED ASSESSEE AND NO NOTICE HAVING BEEN SERVED ON THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES THE ASSESSMENT .IS QUASHED CONSIDERING THE ABOVE LEGAL SETTLED PROPOSITION WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE REASSESSMENTS MADE IN THESE TWO CASES HAVE TO BE QU ASHED AS AO FAILED TO SERVE NOTICE U/S 148 ON THE LEGAL HEIRS/LEGAL REPRESENTAT IVES. ACCORDINGLY THE LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. ITA NO. 124 & 126/ALLD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004-05 3 5. FURTHER WE FIND THAT THERE ARE OTHER GROUNDS RE LATE TO MERITS OF ADDITIONS AND THAT ADJUDICATION OF THESE GROUNDS BECOMES ACADEMIC EXERCISE IN VIEW OF THE RELIEF GRANTED ON THE LEGAL ISSUES. ACCORDINGLY THE GROUN DS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE PARTLY ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF APRIL 2015. SD/- SD/- (C. N. PRASAD) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ALLAHABAD DATED: 27.04.2015 *SRIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT CONCERNED ALLAHABAD THE CIT(A) CONCERNED ALLAHABAD THE DR BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT ALLAHABAD.