Assessment on legal representative fails absent statutory authority, and revenue cannot change the taxpayer's status midstream.

An assessment on a deceased taxpayer's legal representative was treated as unsustainable where the Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923 contained no provision comparable to section 24B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 authorising such a levy. The department did not dispute that absence of an express charging mechanism made the assessments invalid, and the later insertion of section 24B in the 1922 Act supported that interpretation. A separate attempt to sustain the demand by treating the taxpayer as a Hindu undivided family also failed because the revenue had proceeded throughout on the basis of individual assessment and could not shift its stand at a later stage.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessments made on the legal representative after the death of the assessee were ab initio invalid for want of a provision in the Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923 corresponding to section 24B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922; (ii) Whether the appellate authority was justified in disposing of the appeals on the preliminary ground without considering the other grounds, including the claim that the assessee should be assessed as a Hindu undivided family.

Issue (i): Whether the assessments made on the legal representative after the death of the assessee were ab initio invalid for want of a provision in the Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923 corresponding to section 24B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922

Analysis: The assessments related to income of a deceased person and were made on his son as legal representative. The department did not dispute the High Court's view that, following the Bombay decision in Reid, the absence of an express provision like section 24B in the Mysore Income-tax Act, 1923 rendered such assessments unsustainable. The later amendment of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 by insertion of section 24B also showed legislative recognition of the point.

Conclusion: The assessments were invalid and the first question was correctly answered against the department.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellate authority was justified in disposing of the appeals on the preliminary ground without considering the other grounds, including the claim that the assessee should be assessed as a Hindu undivided family

Analysis: The attempted alternative basis of assessment as a Hindu undivided family could not be accepted because the department had assessed the person concerned in the status of an individual and could not later shift to a different case. The High Court also noted that no effective reassessment could be made against the Hindu undivided family because the matter was barred by time, so no useful purpose would be served by answering the second question in the department's favour.

Conclusion: The second question did not assist the department, and the appellate authority's disposal on the preliminary issue did not provide any basis to upset the assessee's position.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed in entirety, and the assessments in question were not sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: An assessment on a deceased person's legal representative cannot be sustained where the governing enactment lacks a provision authorising such assessment, and the revenue cannot later alter the assessed status to support the demand after proceeding on a different footing from the outset.

---