1994 (4) TMI 375 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Assessment made without notice to other legal heirs, liability of a legal representative for deceased's dues based on assets devolved.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses three assessments completed on the petitioner as the son and legal heir of the deceased, who was a mutton dealer. The petitioner did not challenge the assessments earlier but raised concerns when proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act were initiated. The petitioner's contention that assessments made without notice to other legal heirs are invalid is dismissed by the court. The court notes that the petitioner actively participated in the assessment proceedings, did not raise any objections, and was aware of the proceedings. The court declines to set aside the assessments based on this ground as the petitioner acquiesced to the proceedings without raising any objections regarding notice to other legal heirs.

2. The petitioner argued that as one of the heirs and a legal representative, he should only be liable up to the extent of the assets devolved on him from the deceased. The Government Pleader contended that the petitioner had a significant share in the assets left by the deceased, which exceeded the tax demanded. The court does not delve into the specifics of the assets but upholds the legal principle that a legal heir is liable for the deceased's dues only to the extent of the assets devolved on them. The court declares that the petitioner's liability for the dues will be limited to the assets inherited from the deceased, leaving the determination of the share and sufficiency of assets to the revenue recovery authorities for future consideration.

3. In conclusion, the court dismisses the original petition and affirms that the petitioner's liability for the amounts due under the assessments will be restricted to the assets inherited from the deceased. The court refrains from determining the exact share or adequacy of the assets, stating that such matters fall under the jurisdiction of revenue recovery authorities and are not within the purview of the court's decision. The judgment emphasizes the legal principle that a legal heir's liability is limited to the assets inherited from the deceased and does not extend beyond that scope.