ABDUL MAZID MD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN compliance with the request made by this Court in Civil Rule No. 7(M) of 1977, the Tribunal referred this question under S. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of assessment passed without impleading all the legal representatives was valid in law ? "

(2.) IN short the facts can be stated thus. A. Wahid of Dibrugarh was an assessee to income-tax. He had a share of income from Barik Bros., from house property and commission from sale of fish. He filed returns : (1) on 30th March, 1968, for the asst. yr. 1967-68 showing an income of Rs. 21,528 ; (2) on 30th May, 1969, for 1968-69 showing an income of Rs. 39,976 ; and (3) on 28th March, 1970, for 1969-70 showing an income of Rs. 21,979. Before the ITO completed the assessment, he (A. Wahid) died on 17th May, 1971, leaving behind wife, Sahera Sultana, and sons and daughters.

(3.) MR. D. K. Talukdar, counsel for the Revenue, however, contends that in the instant case the widow of the deceased assessee did not say that there were other legal representatives and thereby she gave the impression to the ITO that she had substantially represented the estate and the others were not interested in the matter. He submits that the point raised by MR. Medhi is a mere technicality and cannot be sustained because it would impede the process of assessment. He submits that the present is a case where this Court ought to give an answer in favour of the Revenue. He relied on a decision of the Madras High Court in E. Alfred vs. First Addl. ITO (1957) 32 ITR 401 (Mad). There it was held (headnote):