KUNHI MOHAMMAD HAJEE K Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in O.P. No. 4323 of 1969 and the petitioners in O.P. No. 4451 of 1969 together constitute the legal representatives of the deceased P. Kunhi Bava who was an assessee under the Agricultural Income Tax Act and was being assessed to tax till the assessment year 1968-69. He died on 18-7-1968. After his death, when proceedings for assessment were taken up the legal representatives took the stand that though the income derived by Kunhi Bava till the date of his death, namely 18-7-1968, was liable to be assessed at the hands of the legal representatives, they were liable to be assessed only as tenants in common for the period subsequent to 18-7-1968. Apparently the Agricultural Income Tax Officer took the stand that for the accounting year in which Kunhi Bava died, the income ought to be assessed as if Kunhi Bava was alive for the whole of the year and tax was payable as if the income was derived by him during that year. For this, reliance was placed on the decision in Commissioner of I.T. Bombay City v. Amarchand N. Shroff (48 ITR 59). In spite of the objection by the legal representatives to such a course, the Agricultural Income Tax Officer passed the order which is Ext. P3 in both the cases assessing the legal representatives on the entire income from the properties of Kunhi Bava as if the entire income was that of Kunhi Bava, and received by him. This is what is challenged in the Original Petition.

(2.) S.24 of the Agricultural Income Tax Act which corresponds to S.21B of the Indian Income Tax Act 1922 since repealed reads as follows:

(3.) Construing the corresponding section, S.24B of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922, the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Amarchand N. Shroff (48 ITR 59) observed thus: