9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (4) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years prior to his death, Siddappa made a gift of Rs. 1,38,000, Rs. 69,000 to Mr. T. M. Nagaraju, son of Bhagirathamma, daughter of the petitioner, and Rs. 69,000 to Mallikarjunappa and Viswanadhappa, sons of Gowramma. Bhagirathamma predeceased her father. By a will dated June 10, 1957, Siddappa bequeathed the properties mentioned in the "A" schedule annexed to the will to Gowramma with limited interest and thereafter to her sons, properties mentioned in the " B " schedule to the petitioner with limited interest and thereafter to her daughter and her daughter's sons and the properties mentioned in the " C " schedule to Mudiramma with absolute rights. After the death of Siddappa, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty passed an order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Appellate Tribunal, the Gift-tax Officer, Hindupur, issued notices to the petitioner under section 16(1) of the Gift-tax Act, intimating her that a gift which was assessable to a tax for the assessment year 1958-59 had escaped assessment and proposing to assess the said gift. The petitioner thereupon filed the present application for the issue of a writ of mandamus to prohibit the Gift-tax Officer from taking further proceedings in pursuance of these notices. The petitioner alleged in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that there were three legal representatives of the deceased Siddappa, herself, Gowramma and Mudiramma and that the Gift-tax Officer issued a notice under section 16(1) of the Gift-tax Act only to her a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stress, apart from the petitioner. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty had made an order apportioning the duty payable between the petitioner, Gowramma, and Mudiramma. In the face of these facts which were on record, we do not see how the Gift-tax Officer could venture the statement that he had no knowledge that there were other legal representatives and that there was no satisfactory reason to believe that there were other legal representatives. It can only mean that the Gift-tax Officer was indifferent and did not care to enquire into the question as to who were the legal representatives of Siddappa and to acquaint himself with the necessary and relevant facts. Sri Anantha Babu, learned counsel for the department, tried to urge that e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which the estate is capable of meeting the charge, the gift-tax payable by such person or any sum which would have been payable by him under the Act. The third sub-section of section 19 also provides that the provisions of sections 13, 14 and 16 shall apply to an executor, administrator or other legal representative as they apply to any person referred to in those sections. " Legal representative " is defined in section 2(xvi-b) of the Act as having the same meaning assigned to it as in section 2(11) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 2(11) of the Civil Procedure Code defines a " legal representative " as meaning a person who in law represents the estate of a deceased person, and includes any person who intermeddles with the estate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment could be completed only according to the provisions of section 24B(2) of the Act. The liability imposed under section 24B(2) of the Act attaches itself on all the legal representatives of a deceased on whom notices are served and as such all legal representatives of the deceased assessees are liable to be served with such notices. " A reference was made to the observations of Sir Shadi Lal C.J. in Muhammad Hassan v. Inayat Hussain : " ' These words mean the representation before the court of the plenary interest of the deceased party. Sometimes that interest may be represented by a single individual, but it may also be represented by a number of persons as the case may be. But there should be a complete representation of the int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound by the decision of the Division Bench. Sri Anantha Babu, at one stage, faintly suggested that the decision required reconsideration. He did not, however, pursue the argument and no good reason was shown to us why we should take a different view. In First Additional Income-tax Officer v. Suseela Sadanandan, their Lordships of the Supreme Court accepted the statement of the law made by Mahajan J. in Tirthalal v. Bhusan Mooyee Dasi, that if there were two or more legal representatives of a deceased person, all must be impleaded to make the representation complete. Their Lordships, however, added that if a party after diligent and bona fide enquiry ascertained who the legal representatives of a deceased defendant were and brought them on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
