VITTAL PAI P Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions under article 226 raise a common question of law relating to the scope of the third proviso to section 36 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) THE facts giving rise to these petitions are these :

(3.) PURSUANT to the direction issued by this court in Writ Petitions Nos. 1769 and 1770 of 1967 (P. Cheradppa Pai v. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Puttur), the respondent issued notice under section 19(3) read with section 3 of the Act calling upon the petitioners to show cause why final assessment orders for the years 1965-66 and 1966-67 should not be made against them by apportioning the income of the areca garden to each of the brothers as tenant-in-common. The notice was issued on July 16, 1973. The petitioners filed objections, contending, inter alia, that the proceedings, against them were barred by limitation under section 36 of the Act. Repelling that contention, the respondent passed assessment orders, which are challenged in these petitions.