Purposive construction of "written agreement" extended the tax provision to trustees appointed under wills.

The expression "written agreement" in section 10(1)(a) of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957 was construed purposively as "written instrument" to avoid rendering the reference to executors and trustees appointed under wills ineffective. The provision was treated as in pari materia with section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, where the corresponding language is "written instrument". On that construction, section 10(1)(a) was held applicable and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal. The further contention that the trustee received income partly on his own behalf and partly on behalf of others was left open for examination of the will's terms.

---

---

Issues: Whether the expression "written agreement" in section 10(1)(a) of the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, governing liability of an executor or trustee, should be construed as "written instrument" so as to include a trustee appointed under a will.

Analysis: The provision was held to be in pari materia with section 41 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, where the corresponding expression is "written instrument". A literal reading of "written agreement" would make the reference to executors, who are appointed under wills, ineffective and would defeat the legislative intent. The provision was therefore construed purposively so that the expression "written agreement" was read as "written instrument". The additional contention that the trustee received income partly on his own behalf and partly on behalf of others was not decided and was left open for examination of the terms of the will by the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to have section 10(1)(a) applied on the correct construction of the provision, and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal.

---