RAJA PID NAIK Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner prays for a writ of prohibition or a direction in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondents from pursuing the collection proceedings in the petitioner's case for the assessment for Faslis 1358 and 1359 in respect of the tax due from his father, late Raja Krishtappa Naik.

(2.) THE material facts are not in dispute. THE same may be stated thus. THE petitioner's father was assessed to agricultural income-tax under the Hyderabad Agrl. IT Act, 1950 (to be hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for Faslis 1358 and 1359. For Fasli 1358, the tax assessed was Rs. 1,275- 7-0 and for Fasli 1359, the tax assessed was Rs. 1363-3-0. THE assessee (Raja Krishtappa Naik) unsuccessfully appealed against the assessment order. THEreafter, he was duly served with a notice of demand. Before the amounts assessed could be realised, he died. Hence, steps are being taken against his legal representatives. When the petitioner, one of the legal representatives of the deceased assessee, was required to pay up the arrears of tax, he submitted an application to the second respondent in May, 1960, agreeing to pay the tax due in quarterly instalments of Rs. 100. In pursuance thereof, a sum of Rs. 100 was paid on May 7, 1960, and another sum of Rs. 100 was paid on July 14, 1960. THEreafter, the petitioner appeared to have changed his mind and taken the stand that the proceeding commenced against him under s. 34(3) of the "Act" is without the authority of law. His only contention is that as no notice under s. 23 of the Act had been issued to him, no action can be taken against him under s. 34(3). Sec. 34(3) reads :

(3.) THIS section is similar to s. 24B of the IT Act. Sec. 23 of the "Act" provides :