1973 (3) TMI 13 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of assessment orders upheld without notice to deceased assessee's legal representatives. Tax obligations arise upon notice.

Joseph Joseph Versus Agricultural Income-Tax Officer, Palai.

The court upheld the validity of assessment orders made without notice to legal representatives of the deceased assessee, emphasizing that such notice may ... Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1950 - This writ petition has been filed by a legal representative of one Shri Kurien Ouseph to quash three orders of assessments – held that assessment order would not be defective even though the legal representatives' name was not mentioned in the order Issues:1. Validity of assessment orders passed without notice to legal representatives of the deceased.2. Requirement of notice to legal representatives before passing assessment orders.3. Effect of death of assessee on assessment proceedings.4. Specification of name of legal representative in assessment orders.5. Service of assessment orders on all legal representatives.The judgment deals with a writ petition filed to challenge three assessment orders made by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer without notice to legal representatives of the deceased assessee. The petitioner contended that the orders were invalid as they did not state the names of legal representatives as the assessee. The assessments were initially made against the deceased, Kurian Ouseph, and were later set aside. The respondent proceeded with assessments without notice to legal representatives after the death of the assessee. The petitioner argued that legal representatives should receive notice to produce evidence to prove the correctness of returns submitted by the deceased. The court referred to Section 24(3) of the Act, stating that notices required to be served on the deceased need not be issued to legal representatives before passing assessment orders if proceedings were completed before the death of the assessee. The court cited a Mysore High Court decision supporting this interpretation. The judgment emphasized that the tax becomes payable only upon service of the notice of demand on the legal representative. The court rejected the contention that the orders were invalid due to lack of notice to legal representatives before passing the orders.Furthermore, the judgment discussed a Calcutta High Court decision where assessments made after the death of the assessee without specifying the name of the legal representative were deemed invalid. However, in the present case, assessments were completed during the lifetime of the assessee, and notices were issued to all legal representatives identified by the respondent. The court held that the absence of specifying the name of the legal representative in the assessment orders did not render them defective. The judgment also addressed the argument that only three out of seven legal representatives were served with assessment orders. The court noted that all legal representatives identified by the respondent were served, and any additional claimants could be served separately. The petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.In conclusion, the judgment clarified the legal requirements regarding notice to legal representatives in assessment proceedings, emphasizing that such notice may not be necessary if assessments were concluded before the death of the assessee. The court highlighted the importance of serving the notice of demand on the legal representative for tax payment obligations. Additionally, the judgment distinguished cases where assessments were initiated post-death, emphasizing the completion of proceedings during the assessee's lifetime in the present case. The court's decision underscored the significance of serving identified legal representatives with assessment orders and demand notices, dismissing the petition challenging the assessment orders.