K MD IQBAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS tax revision case is directed against the order of the Tamil Nadu Agrl. ITAT, dt. 3rd March, 1981, passed in ATA No. 258 of 1980.

(2.) THE petitioners were assessed on a net agricultural income of Rs. 12, 010 for the asst. yr. 1978-79 in the status of an association of individuals. Before the Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner disputed the status of association of individuals as also the estimated income. THE plea of the petitioners was that since the sale deed had been taken jointly in the name of ten persons, there was a presumption in law that where there is no indication in the sale deed that the buyers would take unequally, then, they shall take equally and they could not be assessed as association of individuals. It was argued before the appellate authority that the mere fact that the land had been purchased jointly and cultivated through one of them would not render them liable to be assessed in the status of association of individuals. THE plea, however, did not find favour with the Assistant Commissioner. A further appeal before the Tamil Nadu Agrl. ITAT also failed. Before the Tribunal, no arguments, however, were advanced during the course of the hearing as regards the estimate of income. THE Tribunal noticed that even before the Assistant Commissioner, the estimate of income had not been seriously questioned. In the revision before us, no arguments have also been raised with regard to the estimate of income. THE only question raised before us is about the correctness of the order of the Tribunal upholding the assessment in the status of association of individuals. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the submissions which had been raised before the statutory authorities including the Tribunal, and vehemently argued that neither the joint ownership nor the common enjoyment of the property could give rise to any inference that the assessees had the status of association of individuals. It was argued that the assessees were tenants-in-common because they held joint ownership. Reliance has been placed on certain judgments, which we shall deal with at the appropriate place in this judgment.

(3.) SOME facts, which are not in dispute are : that the assessees filed the returns noting the status as "tenants-in-common". The assessees had jointly purchased the land from the vendors by means of two sale deeds. In the sale deeds, however, neither the shares of the individuals were specified nor was there any indication regarding the contributions made by each of the ten persons, who had jointly purchased the land. The cultivation of the land also was done only through one purchaser, viz., Thiru Kayoom. What is the status of the assessees, as deductible from the aforesaid facts, is the only question requiring our consideration. To answer this question, it is desirable to refer to the relevant statutory provisions first.