Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The Ld A.R submitted that the above said provisions clearly demarcate the liability of legal representatives and executors. The Ld A.R submitted that as per provisions of sec. 159 of the Act, the legal representatives are liable to pay tax on the income accrued to the deceased till the date of death of the assessee, which the deceased person would have paid had he been alive. He further submitted that as per provisions of sec. 168 of the Act, the income accruing to the deceased for the period subsequent to his death has to be treated as the "income of Estate of deceased assessee" and shall be taxable in the hands of the Executors in his capacity of an executor. If the concerned asset has already devolved on the legal heir under inheritance, then the said asset shall become property of the legal heir in his own right and the income arising there from shall be assessed on the legal heir in his individual capacity.

22. Further clause 6 of the Will specifically provides that the rest and residue of the estate which will consist of cash on hand and items of daily personal wear is bequeathed to his son Anoop Vrajlal Mehta and daughter-in-law Devaushi Anoop Mehta in equal shares. Since these HSBC bank accounts have not been mentioned in the will, even though they were deposited before the death of Vrajlal C Mehta, yet they will devolve upon the legal representatives only. Therefore the assessment of the same would fall within the purview of sec.159 of the Act, as the deceased would have been liable to E s ta te of L a te S h r i V r a j l a l C h a n d ul a l M e h t a pay tax on that income, had he been alive. Accordingly she submitted that the AO has rightly assessed the income in the hands of Anoop Mehta as legal representative of late Vrajlal C Mehta.

26. The Ld A.R, in the rejoinder, submitted that the legal heirs can be assessed only in respect income earned by an assessee prior to his death. He submitted that a dead person cannot earn any income. The assets held by him may generate income. Hence there cannot be any assessable income in the hands of any deceased individual, which is liable to be assessee in the hands of legal heirs as legal representatives. He submitted that the balance lying in HSBC bank account has only been received by the Executors only on behalf of Estate of late Shri Vrjlal C Mehta. Hence the Executors has filed return of income in the name of Estate of late Shri Vrajlal C Mehta offering the receipts as its income, initially in AY 2012-13 and subsequently part of income was offered in AY 2006-07 and 2007-08. The taxes have also been paid by them only. He submitted that, if the deposits cannot be considered as part of "Estate" and if it is considered to have devolved upon the legal heirs by inheritence, then the legal heirs shall become owners of assets in their own right and hence the impugned income should have been assessed in the hands of the legal heirs in their individual capacity. Accordingly he submitted that income could have been assessed either in the hands of "Estate of late Vrajlal C Mehta" or in the individual hands of the legal heirs. Certainly it could not have been assessed in the hands of the deceased assessee through the legal heirs.

34. Even if we accept the contentions of Ld CIT-DR that the HSBC accounts do not form part of assets of Estate as correct for a moment, then those assets shall devolve upon the legal heirs as per the law. Since the year under consideration falls after the death of Shri Vrajlal C Mehta, the income relating to the impugned deposits has to be assessed only in the hands of legal heirs in their individual capacity, since they have inherited the assets of the deceased in their own right. In that kind of situation also, the assessment in the hands of Late Vrajlal Mehta through his legal heir Shri Anoop Mehta could not be possible.