Legal representative liability under tax law requires a fresh demand notice before recovery can proceed.

A legal representative inherits liability to pay the deceased assessee's tax out of the estate, but that liability is not the deceased's default. Default arises only after a notice of demand is served under section 23 and the amount is not paid within the prescribed time. Section 34(3) of the Hyderabad Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, applies only to an assessee in default and cannot be used against a legal representative before a fresh notice of demand is served and disobeyed. The recovery machinery cannot be extended by analogy to bypass the statutory demand requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether a legal representative of a deceased assessee becomes an "assessee in default" under section 34(3) of the Hyderabad Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, so as to permit recovery proceedings without a fresh notice of demand under section 23.

Analysis: Section 22(1) makes the legal representative liable to pay the tax of the deceased out of the estate, and sections 23 and 33 show that default arises only after service of a notice of demand and failure to pay within the prescribed time. The liability transmitted by section 22(1) is not the deceased's default; it is only the obligation to pay. Section 34(3), being confined to recovery from an "assessee in default," cannot be invoked against the legal representative until a notice of demand is served on him and he fails to comply. The machinery of recovery cannot be extended by analogy from execution of decrees so as to dispense with the statutory demand.

Conclusion: The legal representative was not an assessee in default under section 34(3) without service of a fresh notice of demand under section 23, and the recovery proceedings could not continue against him on that basis.

---