2023 (7) TMI 1505 - HC - Income Tax

Claim of the petitioner as a legatee/nephew under a registered Will of late assessee - Proof of relationship between the petitioner and the deceased individuals - HELD THAT - It is noticed that while dismissing W.P. filed by the late assessee/M.Pappammal, this Court had given liberty to the said M.Pappammal to approach the Appropriate Authority to get copies of the documents viz., Mahajjar and panchanama. The said M.Pappammal is said to have died on 16.07.2020. There is a registered Will that has been kept along with the typed set of papers to indicate that the deceased M.Pappammal had earlier executed a registered Will in favour of the petitioner on 22.12.2022. According to the petitioner, the deceased S.M.Pandian, also has a son by name Balaji. Therefore, the Department can furnish the documents to the petitioner only after appropriate notice to the legal heir of S.M.Pandian namely Balaji. Letter dated 29.11.2021 of the Income Tax Officer Headquarters (Investigation), Chennai, has also called upon the fourth respondent to guide the petitioner to approach the concern Assessing Officer from whom the petitioner may secure the document. Thus, direct the fourth respondent to inform the petitioner as to the Assessing Circle whether the late S.M.Pandian was assessed and so the petitioner can proceed further. Before furnishing any of the documents to the petitioner due notice shall be issued to the legal heir of late S.M.Pandian named Balaji. This exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to furnish documents related to a search conducted in the past.
2. Dismissal of a writ petition filed by the petitioner's grand aunt.
3. Claim of the petitioner as a legatee under a registered Will.
4. Lack of disclosure of relationship between the petitioner and the deceased individuals.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The petitioner, claiming to be the nephew of late M.Pappammal, sought documents seized in a search conducted in 1997 to prove the contents of a registered Will executed in 2015. Despite previous court orders, the documents were not provided by the respondents, leading to the current petition.
2. A previous writ petition filed by M.Pappammal in 2006 was dismissed, with the court directing her to approach the appropriate authority for the documents sought. The court observed a lack of reason for challenging an assessment order and emphasized the need for approaching the relevant authority for document copies.
3. The petitioner, as a legatee under the registered Will of M.Pappammal, sought the documents for legal purposes. The respondents argued that the petitioner did not disclose the nature of the relationship with M.Pappammal or the deceased S.M.Pandian, raising concerns about furnishing the requested information.
4. The court acknowledged the petitioner's claim under the registered Will and directed the respondents to inform the petitioner about the assessment status of S.M.Pandian. Additionally, the court ordered that before providing any documents, proper notice must be given to the legal heir of S.M.Pandian, named Balaji, within four weeks.

Overall, the judgment addressed the failure to provide documents, the history of previous petitions, the petitioner's claim under the registered Will, and the requirement for proper disclosure of relationships. The court's directions aimed to ensure transparency and legal compliance in furnishing the requested documents while safeguarding the rights of all parties involved.