1975 (1) TMI 12 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of filing a return beyond the prescribed period for assessment year 1956-57.
2. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax to initiate proceedings under section 33B against legal representatives of a deceased assessee.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a situation where the Income-tax Officer received voluntary returns of income for assessment years 1956-57 to 1961-62 on March 31, 1962, completed assessments on the same day, and issued demand notices. The Commissioner of Income-tax later issued a show-cause notice under section 33B of the Act to the assessee, who had passed away. The legal representatives contended that proceedings could not be initiated against them under section 33B. The Commissioner set aside the assessments, directing fresh assessments. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, stating that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to issue the notice to legal representatives. However, the High Court disagreed, citing the decision of the Supreme Court in a similar case, holding that legal representatives are considered as assessees under the Act. The Court ruled in favor of the revenue on this issue.

2. The second issue revolved around the interpretation of the term "assessee" in the context of legal representatives of a deceased assessee. The Tribunal had ruled that legal representatives were not assessees under section 33B. However, the High Court disagreed, citing the Supreme Court's decision in a different case, which clarified that legal representatives are indeed considered assessees under the Act. The Court emphasized that the liability of legal representatives extends to all liabilities under the Act and is not limited to specific sections like 24B. Therefore, the High Court ruled in favor of the revenue on this issue as well, stating that legal representatives are considered assessees within the meaning of the Act. The Court highlighted that the legal fiction of representation must be fully applied to ensure statutory liabilities are met. The judgment concluded by awarding costs to the revenue and certifying the judgment for two counsel.