Subba Rao, J. - (1.) These two appeals raise the question of construction of the relevant provisions of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 (Act IX of 1939), hereinafter called the Act.
(2.) One R. K. Handique executed in respect of his properties a deed of trust, dated January 8, 1941, whereunder he appointed four trustees, with an option to co-opt another person as a trustee. He appointed his son, the appellant, as a Managing Trustee. The trustees had to administer the estate and realise the income and make disbursements in the manner prescribed in the trust deed. For the assessment years 1954-55 and 1955-56, the Managing Trustee was assessed to agricultural income-tax on the total income from the trust properties under S. 12 of the Act. The assessee, inter alia, contended that the assessment should have been made under S. 13 of the Act and not under S. 12 thereof. The Income-tax Officer and, on revision, the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam, rejected his contention. At the instance of the assessee, the Member, Board of Agricultural Income-tax, Assam, referred the following question to the High Court of Assam for its decision: "Whether the assessments for the years 1954-55 and 1955-56 should have been made under S. 13 of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act." The High Court answered the question in the negative. Hence the appeals.
(3.) The short question in these appeals is whether the assessments should have been made under S. 12 of the Act or under S. 13 thereof. At the outset it will be convenient to read the two sections: Section 12. (1) Save as provided in Section 10, 13 and 14 if a person holds land from which agricultural income is derived partly for his own benefit and partly for the benefit of beneficiaries, agricultural income-tax shall be assessed on the total agricultural income derived from such land at the rate which would be applicable if such person had held the land exclusively for his own benefit and agricultural income-tax so payable shall be assessed on the person holding such land, and he shall be liable to pay the same. (2) ********** Explanation.-In this section 'beneficiary' means a person entitled to a portion of the agricultural income derived from the land Section 13. Where any person holds land, from which agricultural income is derived, as a common manager appointed under any law for the time being in force or under any agreement or as receiver administrator, or the like on behalf of persons jointly interested in such land or in the agricultural income derived therefrom, the aggregate of sums payable as agricultural income-tax by each person on the agricultural income derived from such land and received or receivable by him shall be assessed on such common manager, receiver administrator or the like and he shall be deemed to be the assessee in respect of the agricultural income-tax so payable by each such person and shall be liable to pay the same." Section 13 is subject to S. 12. If S. 13 applies to an assessee, S. 12 (1) is necessarily excluded. If the assessment was made under S. 12 of the Act, the assessee would be assessed on the total agricultural income derived from such land at the rate which would be applicable if such person had held the land exclusively for his own benefit; and if it was made under S. 13 of the Act, the assessee would be liable to pay the total of the taxes payable by each of the persons on whose behalf he was holding the land. The tax payable under S. 12 would be higher than that payable under S. 13. Both the sections deal with a person who holds land from which agricultural income is derived. The expression "holds" includes a two-fold idea of the actual possession of a thing and also of being invested with a legal title. Sometimes it is used only to mean actual possession. But under S. 12 the expression is used in the wider sense, for under that section the person mentioned therein holds land partly for his benefit or partly for the benefit of the beneficiary or wholly for the benefit of the beneficiary. In its wide phraseology the section takes in the trustees in whom property vests and also managers and the like who manage the properties on behalf of others. But, if the case falls under S. 13, to that extent it is taken out of S. 12. As the same expression "holds" is used in S. 13, it must be given the same meaning as it bears in S. 12; that is to say, it takes in both title and possession. That section deals with persons who hold land on behalf of persons jointly interested in the land or in the agricultural income derived therefrom. It does not, therefore, apply to a person who holds land on his own behalf as well as on behalf of others. It deals with two categories of persons, namely, (i) common manager appointed under any law for the time being in force or under an agreement-managers who do not fall under the above category are outside the section; and (ii) receivers, administrators or the like. Other persons, even though they hold land on behalf of persons jointly interested in such land or the agricultural income derived therefrom, are outside the scope of this section.;