(1.) Tulsi Charan Law died on 6th of January, 1962, leaving behind him his wife, six sons and four daughters. He left a will executed on 20th December, 1956. In the said will he provided as follows:
(2.) No executor was appointed under the said will. The wife and the major sons applied to this court for the grant of letters of administration in respect of the properties left by late Tulsi Charan Law. It is not clear from the statement of the case as to when that application was made. It is stated that probate proceedings were pending in this court as mentioned hereinbefore. It is not apparent as to since when the said probate proceedings were pending in this court. It appears that Smt. Tarasundari Auddy, one of the married daughters of the testator, filed a caveat in this court challenging the will. Pending the suit this court by its order dated 1st of May, 1963, appointed Smt. Mahamaya Dassi, the widow of the testator as administratrix pendents lite. In the said order, it was provided as follows:
(3.) We are concerned in this reference with the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 and the corresponding accounting years were the respective financial years. It is clear that for the assessment year 1963-64 for which the financial year was from April 1, 1962, to March 31, 1963, there was no administratrix pendente Ute and during the subsequent year an appointment had been made as mentioned hereinbefore. But it appears that for both the years Sm. Mahamaya Dassi had furnished returns of income under the I.T. Act, 1961, as administratrix pendente lite to the estate of Tulsi Charan Law showing the status as individual. Whether in respect of the first year with which we are concerned that was the correct position taken up by Mahamaya Dassi or whether the ITO was justified in proceeding on that basis is a point on which none of the parties have agitated. But this is a point in respect of which we shall advert later.