STATE OF MADRAS Vs. PATTAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE revision cases are filed by the State against the decision of the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeals Nos. 24, 25 and 26 of 1962. The revision cases arise in the following circumstances. For each of the three years of assessment 1958-59, 1959-60 and 1960-61, the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Kumbakonam, assessed five persons who were the beneficiaries under five distinct settlement deeds, as having formed an association of individuals within the meaning of section 2(c) read with the charging section 3 of the Madras Agricultural Income-tax Act. The Assistant Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax on appeal confirmed the order of the assessing officer, and on further appeal to the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal held that there was no association of individuals, in the circumstances of the case, and set aside the assessment orders on the basis of that finding. The State has filed these revision cases against the orders of the Tribunal.

(2.) THE facts of the case are briefly the following. One Pattammal who appears to have been a lady owning extensive properties, executed five settlement deeds settling different extents of properties on five different persons in the following manner :

(3.) THE finding arrived at by the Tribunal, as stated above, on an examination of the evidence in the case, is adequate for the conclusion that the several deeds of settlement were acted upon, and that the income of each beneficiary was shown separately in the appropriate account. However, there was an observation that the income from all the properties, at a particular stage, was deposited in the Kumbakonam Bank to the credit of the settler as well as her son-in-law, Raghunathachariar, and since we had a doubt about this aspect of the case, we permitted the respondents to file an affidavit explaining the circumstances under which such a deposit was made. A copy of the affidavit was supplied to the learned Government Pleader. From this affidavit it would appear that there were two persons by name Narayana Iyengar and Srinivasagopalachari who were residents of the villages, and who looked after the lands of the different settles after making their own arrangement either for pannai cultivation or cultivation by lessees on warm. But those agents took care to show the income from each settlers lands separately. THE settles were absentee landlords and did not care to leave large sums of money in the possession of the above two agents in the village. When the paddy was sold, an account was opened in the Kumbakonam Co-operative Urban Bank in the joint names of Pattammal and her son-in-law and the amounts were immediately deposited there. But the amounts so deposited were duly remitted to the different beneficiaries at the earliest opportunity. Thus the amount due to Ramanujam, one of the settles, who is the brothers son of Pattammal and brother of Raghunathachari, was sent by bank draft to his address. THE amounts due to the minor grand-daughter of Pattammal represented by their father and mother as trustees were remitted to a separate account opened in the joint names of Pattammals daughter and her son-in-law in the Indian Bank. THE affidavit proceeds to state that for the amounts thus due to the minor grand-daughters, National Savings Certificates had been purchased. This statement in the affidavit is in accord with the finding of the Tribunal that the different settlement deeds were fully acted upon and the fact that the settles had two common agents to look after the lands in the village (they being absentee landlords) did not make any difference to their getting from their own lands the appropriate income due in respect of these lands. THE fact that different owners of properties, who were absents landlords, for their own convenience, secured the help of two residents in the village for looking after their lands and cultivating them, would not ipso facto constitute them as an association of individuals within the special meaning given to that term for the purpose of assessment under the Agricultural Income-tax Act. This aspect of the matter was considered by us recently in T. Cs. Nos. 49, 52 and 59 of 1963.