Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

24. I cannot assent to the argument addressed before us that the word "payable" is synonymous with the word "due" in the definition contained in section 2(2) of the Act. The word "payable", in my opinion, according to its ordinary meaning, refers to that which is to be paid. "Payable", in the definition means "to be paid" and that is the ordinary dictionary meaning of the word "payable". So, every person by whom income-tax is to be paid would be an assessee within the meaning of the definition. After the death of Bademiya the petitioner is the person by whom income-tax is to be paid, although the tax is to be so paid from the estate of Bademiya.

61. The first case on which Mr. Venkataramiah relied is that decided by their Lordships of the High Court of Madras in E. Alfred v. Additional Income-tax Officer. In that case, a penalty was imposed on a legal representative of a deceased assessee in respect of whose income an assessment order had been after the death of the assessee. On his legal representative committing default in the payment of the tax determined, a penalty was imposed on him under the provisions of section 46(1) of the Act.

66. In Abdul Kassim v. First Additional Income-tax Officer, after the death of the deceased assessee, noticed under section 22(2) of the Act were served on his legal representatives and, on their committing default in the payment of the tax, a certificate was dispatched by the Income-tax Officer to the Collector under section 46(2) of the Act. Their Lordships expressed the view that although it could be said that the legal representative was in the arrears, it could not, however, be said that he was an assessee in arrears and this conclusion was based on the earlier pronouncement in Alfred v. Additional Income-tax Officer.

73. There is no discussion in this case of the question whether the partners on whom notices were served could be regarded as assessees within the meaning of section 46 and this decision can, therefore, be of no assistance to the petitioner.

74. Their Lordships of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh have at least on two occasions taken a contrary view in Raja Manyam Meenakshamma v. Commissioner of Income-tax. An assessee died during pendency of an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and his legal representative claimed to have the right to continue the appeal under section 33 of the Act. His competence to continue the appeal in that way was questioned on the ground that, since he was only a legal representative of the deceased assessee and was not himself an assessee, the appeal abated with the death of the assessee and could not therefore be continued by the legal representative.