This article discusses the appeal filed by Meena Rani Khatana against the decision of the CIT(A), Hisar for the assessment year 2009-10, highlighting procedural flaws and the implications of assessing income as undisclosed.
Meena Rani Khatana filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed her previous appeals and upheld the additions made by the assessing officer to her income for the year 2009-10, treating cash deposits in her bank account as undisclosed income.
The appellant contested the CIT(A)’s decision on several grounds, arguing that the assessment was made without proper notice and on a deceased person, and challenged the procedural validity of the assessment under sections 147/148 and 144 of the Income Tax Act.
The tribunal noted that the assessment was initially conducted without the knowledge that the original assessee had passed away, leading to complications in the proceedings. The absence of proper representation during the hearings further complicated the case.
The tribunal, recognizing the procedural errors and the need for a fair hearing, remanded the case back to the assessing officer to reassess after properly notifying the legal heirs and providing a reasonable opportunity for representation.
This case underscores the importance of procedural compliance in tax assessments and the rights of taxpayers to a fair hearing. It also highlights the complexities involved when the taxpayer is deceased and the need for clear communication between taxpayers’ families and tax authorities.
The outcome of this appeal serves as a reminder for both taxpayers and tax authorities to maintain diligent records and communication, especially in cases involving deceased estates.
Meena Rani Khatana vs. ITO Ward-1, Hisar for AY 2009-10 – ITA No. 250/DEL/2021
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform