JOSEPH JOSEPH Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by a legal representative of one Shri Kurien Ouseph to quash three orders of assessments, exhibits P-l, P-2 and P-3, all dated September 15, 1969, made by the respondent, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Palai, under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, for the years 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69. In all the assessments, the name 6f the assessee is described as "Legal heirs of Late Shri Kurian Ouseph". The impugned orders of assessment were passed Without notice to any of the legal representatives of the deceased; and the contention before me is that such an order of assessment is bad under law. It is also contended that the said orders are bad, for the reason that they do not state the names of the legal representatives as the assessee.

(2.) THE facts of the case are not in dispute. Assessments were first made, against the deceased, Kurian Ouseph, under Section 18(4) of the Act, Those assessments were set aside by the respondent on applications made by the deceased under Section 19 of the Act. After that, a pre-assessment notice was issued by the respondent to the deceased on January 8, 1969, in respect of the assessment for the year 1968-69 calling for his objections, if any, and posting the case for hearing on January 17, 1969. THE deceased applied for time, which was granted up to January 31, 1969, But, he did not file any objection. Pre-assessment notices were again issued in respect of the assessments for all the three years to the deceased on June 5, 1969, calling for his objections, if any, and posting the case to June 13, 1969. THE deceased again applied for time; and time was granted up to June 20, 1969. THE deceased made further applications for adjournment on the above date, which were rejected by the respondent; and the cases stood reserved for passing the assessment orders. Before the orders were made, the respondent received intimation that the deceased died on September 2, 1969. However, the respondent proceeded to make the assessments; and he passed the impugned orders in the manner stated above on September 15, 1969. THE respondent made an enquiry through the revenue department as to who were the legal representatives of the deceased. THE revenue reported the names of three persons as the sole legal representatives. THE petitioner was one of them. Accordingly, the respondent issued copies of the assessment orders together with notices of demand on all the said three persons. THEreupon, the petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the said assessments on the grounds already stated.

(3.) I have support for the above view in a Division Bench decision of the Mysore High Court in Abdul Rahman v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [1961] I.L.R. I9G1 Mys. 1181. The facts of that case were almost similar to the one before me except for one difference, viz., the impugned, assessment in the Mysore case was made without notice of the fact that the assessee had died, while in the instant case, the Income-tax Officer had knowledge about the death of the assessee before the impugned orders were passed. But I do not think that this will make any difference on the application of Section 24(3) of the Kerala Act, which corresponds to Section 23(2) of the Mysore Act. The Mysore High Court held that, if the entire investigation of the assessment proceedings has come to a conclusion during the lifetime of the , deceased, it was plainly unnecessary for the Income-tax Officer to issue notice to the legal representative of the assessee and start the proceedings afresh. The Mysore High Court also held that the principle underlying Rule 6 of Order XXII of the Civil Procedure Code would apply to such a case. Rule 6 reads :