Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessment made on V. Ramanathan as legal representative of the estate of the deceased assessee was valid in law.
Analysis: The expression "legal representative" in the Income-tax Act was construed in the light of its ordinary meaning and the definition in section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure, namely, a person who represents the estate of a deceased person. The Court held that where a deceased leaves behind more than one heir, each heir is capable of representing the estate, and the mere fact that all heirs were not separately brought on record does not by itself invalidate proceedings. The decisive question was whether the estate was in fact represented in the reassessment proceedings. On the facts, Ramanathan was an heir and was in possession of the estate through the line of succession from the deceased assessee, and he also represented the joint family in the proceedings.
Conclusion: The assessment on Ramanathan as legal representative was valid, and the contention of the assessee failed.
Final Conclusion: Proceedings under the Act against one heir could sustain the assessment where that heir represented the estate, and the subsequent devolution or blending of the property did not defeat liability arising from escaped income of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of reassessment against a deceased assessee's estate, a single heir in whom the estate is represented can validly be proceeded against as legal representative, and omission to implead every heir does not by itself vitiate the assessment if the estate is otherwise represented in good faith.