HEGDE, J. - (1.) THESE are connected petitions. Common questions of law arise for decision in these petitions. Therefore, they can be dealt with in one order.
(2.) ALL the petitioners are the children of one Nagappa. The question of their liability to be assessed for the assessment year 1958 -59 arises in these petitions. Originally, Nagappa was assessed to tax, the income with which we are concerned in these petitions. That assessment was set aside by this court in I.T.R.A. No. 3 of 1962 on August 13, 1962. Thereafter, the Income Tax Officer, City Circle II, respondent in these petitions, issued notices to the petitioners under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to be hereinafter referred to as "the Act". The petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 583, 584, 585 and 588 of 1963 are minors. Notices have been issued in their individual names and not in the name of their guardian. The notices issued to the petitioners were served on K. Shivana, the clerk of Nagappa, the petitioner's father. For the assessment year in question all these petitions had previously submitted returns under section 22 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922. The Income Tax Officer held them to be not assessable. On the other hand, he held Nagappa to be liable to pay tax on the income in question and assessed him for the same which assessment, as mentioned earlier, was set aside by this court. In these petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ of prohibition or direction prohibiting the respondent from assessing them to tax, for the assessment year 1958 -59, in pursuance of the notices referred to earlier.
(3.) SRI K. Srinivasan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, formulated three points in support of the prayer made in these petitions. They are : (i) the notices served on K. Shivanna, not being in conformity with the provisions contained in section 282 of the Act, no further steps can be taken in pursuance of those notices; (ii) the notices issued in the names of the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 583, 584 and 588 of 1963 (all minors) are invalid notices and, therefore, no assessment can be made on the basis of those notices; and (iii) on the facts of these cases, there is no question of reopening the assessment made on the petitioners as they had not been assessed at all. We shall now consider these points one by one.;