IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER&

SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6514/MUM/2025 (AY: 2012-13)

(Physical hearing)

NishaRajendraMavani Legal Heir of ITO – 19(2)(4), Mumbai NavnitDharamsiParmani Vs Piramal Chambers, 7-B, Ganga Laheri Apartment CHS, Mumbai – 400012.

Building No. 19, Banganga Road, Walkeshwar, Mumbai – 400006.

[PAN : ABDVPP8756R]

Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Ashish Thakurdesai,CA Revenue by Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR Date of Institution 11.10.2025 Date of hearing 12.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 11.02.2026 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;

1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 13.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre ought to have held that the reopening of assessment of the appellant u/s 147/148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law.

2. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre ought to have held that assessment order passed in the name of deceased person is bad in law.

3. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre ought to have deleted addition of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- u/s 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

4. On facts, in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre ought to have deleted interest charged of Rs.32,63,040/- u/s 234A, and Rs.34,48,440/- u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify OR DLEETE any of the above Grounds of Appeal.”

2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that assessing officer passed the assessment order against the dead person. The assessment was passed on 06.12.2019, though the assessee died on 23.10.2019, copy of death certificate is placed on record. No notice either under section 148 or any other notice during the assessment was received by legal heirs of assessee. The appellant while filing appeal before ld. CIT(A) in Form 35 clearly mentioned this fact that the assessee has died. Despite bringing such fact in the notice of ld. CIT(A), no remedial action was taken by ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of assessing officer. The ld. AR of the appellant submits that it is admitted position under the law that order against the dead person is nullity. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that there is no obligation under the provision of Income Tax Act to intimate the death of assessee to Revenue as has been held by Delhi High Court in Sativa Kapila Legal Heir of Late Shri Mohinder Paul Kapila vs ACIT W.P.(C) 3258/2020.

3. On merit, during the lifetime of assessee, he received compensation on account of surrender of tenancy right, which was invested for purchase/ acquisition of new residential property. The assessee received Rs. 1.20 crore as compensation on surrender of tenancy rightvide agreement dated 01.09.2009, copy of agreement is filed on record. Under the said agreement the assessee was allotted alternative flat in the redeveloped project, where the assessee was tenant. However, the project was getting delayed, thus, new agreement was executed with builder and in place on flat, the assessee was given compensation for surrender of tenancy vide agreement dated 08.08.2011, copy of which is also placed on record. The receipt/ amount is otherwise capital receipt, though it was invested for purchase of new residential house on 16.08.2011, being flat No. 7-B, 3^Rd Floor, Gangalaheri Cooperative Society, copy of regis