TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1981 (7) TMI 15
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....last holder of the Bettiah Estate. She died on 27th November, 1954, that is to say, before the relevant financial year 1956-57, in respect of which the assessment has been made. The ITO assessed the income of the estate at the maximum rate under s. 41 of the Act. In appeal the manager, court of wards, submitted that on the death of Maharani Janki Kuer, the Bettiah Estate escheated to the State of Bihar and was, therefore, not taxable under s. 41 at the maximum rate, which was rejected by the AAC by order dated 6th December, 1957. On further appeal by the assessee, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that " the question of heirship to the estate is now the subject-matter of a pending litigation started by one Suresh Nandan Sinha claiming ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eferred to the High Court by the, Tribunal had become academic and it was not necessary to answer the second question in view of the first question being answered in favour of the assessee. Against the said order, the Commissioner moved the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court by order dated 24th February, 1967, in 'Civil Appeal No. 1172 of 1965 [CIT v. Manager, Court of Wards, Bettiah Estate [1968] 67 ITR 197 (SC)], set aside the judgment of this court dated 17th December, 1963 ([1964] 54 ITR 6 (Pat)), restored that case and directed disposal of the same in accordance with law and in the light of the observations contained in the judgment after the disposal of the appeal of Suresh Nandan Sinha claiming to be the nearest heir of late Maharan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal on the 31st January, 1976. It was mentioned in the supplementary statement of case that the appeal filed by Suresh Nandan Sinha had been disposed of by the High Court and the judgment of the lower court taking the view that the estate of Bettiah had escheated to the State of Bihar had been set aside. Mr. Kailash Roy appearing on behalf of the petitioner has fairly conceded that on account of the judgment of the High Court reversing the judgment of the trial court taking the view that the estate of Bettiah had escheated to the State of Bihar, assessment could be made upon the Manager, Court of Wards, Bettiah Estate. With regard to the second question it has been submitted that in view of s. 41(1) of the Act and in view of the jud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ; but, where such persons have no other personal income chargeable under this Act and none of them is an artificial juridical person, as if such income, profits or gains or such part thereof were the total income of an association of persons: Provided further that when part only of the income, profits and gains of a trust is chargeable under this Act, that proportion only of the income, profits and gains receivable by a beneficiary from the trust which the part so chargeable bears to the whole income, profits and gains of the trust shall be deemed to have been derived from that part." It is an admitted position before us that the State of Bihar has also filed an appeal against the judgment of this court holding that there has been n....