Individual liability for profession tax and civil court bar upheld under the Punjab Municipal Act's assessment framework.

Partners carrying on a business in partnership were individually assessable to profession tax under section 61(1)(b) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, because the provision taxed "persons" carrying on trade or calling and a partnership is not a separate legal entity from its partners; the levy was therefore within the statute. The civil court's jurisdiction to question the assessment was barred by sections 84 and 86, which provide a special statutory mechanism for objections and exclude challenges in another forum where the municipal authority has acted under the Act. The assessment was upheld and the civil challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether partners carrying on business in partnership were individually liable to profession tax under section 61(1)(b) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. (ii) Whether the civil court's jurisdiction to challenge the assessment was barred by sections 84 and 86 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911.

Issue (i): Whether partners carrying on business in partnership were individually liable to profession tax under section 61(1)(b) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911.

Analysis: Section 61(1)(b) imposes a tax on "persons" practising a profession or carrying on a trade or calling in the municipality. A partnership firm is not a separate legal entity distinct from its partners; the business is carried on by the partners, who act jointly and severally. The statutory language did not exclude persons carrying on trade in partnership from individual liability, and the argument based on possible double taxation was rejected as speculative on the facts, since the firm itself had not been assessed.

Conclusion: The partners were validly assessable as individual persons carrying on trade, and the levy was within section 61(1)(b).

Issue (ii): Whether the civil court's jurisdiction to challenge the assessment was barred by sections 84 and 86 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911.

Analysis: Sections 84 and 86 provide a special statutory mechanism for objections to assessment or levy and bar any challenge in another forum or manner. That bar applies where the grievance concerns assessment or the principle of assessment and the authority has acted under the statute, even if the assessment is said to be erroneous. The case did not fall within the narrow class where the municipality acts outside or in abuse of its powers.

Conclusion: The civil suit was barred and the civil court lacked jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The assessment was upheld and the challenge failed because the partners were separately taxable under the municipal provision and the statutory appellate remedy excluded civil court intervention.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a municipal tax is expressly imposed on "persons" carrying on trade, partners in a firm may be assessed individually if they themselves carry on the trade, and a special statutory remedy for assessment disputes excludes civil court jurisdiction.

---