Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. - (1.) In this reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the following question has been referred to this court: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a correct interpretation of Sections 159 and I 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that in respect of the income of the late ' Rana ' which accrued to or was received by him till the time of his death the assessments could be made on the 'Rani' who was his sole heir and legal representative ? "
(2.) This reference relates to the assessment years 1946-47 to 1951-52, The assessee was an individual and his name was Lt. Genl. Madan S.S.J.B. Rana of Nepal (hereinafter referred to as " Rana ") He died on or about 20th of June, 1953, intestate leaving behind him his widow, Rani Jagadamba Kumari Devi (hereinafter referred to as " the Rani "). The Rani was residing beyond the jurisdiction of this High Court at Varanasi. This court on the application of Shri Shantilal Mehta (who was the duly constituted attorney in India of the Rani) appointed him as the administrator of the estate of the late "Rana" by an order dated 16th January, 1954. It may be appropriate to refer to the order appointing the administrator. The said order after stating the facts that the "Rana" died and the further fact that the constituted attorney of the "Rana" had applied that he (the Rana) died intestate and the further fact that the sole heir was the "Rani" observed, inter alia, as follows : "for the use and benefit of the said Rani Jagadamba Kumari Devi and limited until she, the said Rani Jagadamba Kumari Devi, shall obtain from this court letters of administration of the property and credits of the deceased abovenamed he, the said Shantilal Mehta, having undertaken to administer the said property."
(3.) In the course of the original assessments "Rana" had made a declaration that the income received by him from the various investments belonged to a trust of which he was only one of the 36 beneficiaries and the ITO, therefore, made the assessments on what, according to the "Rana", was his share of the income of the trust. Later on, the ITO found that the trust was invalid and the declaration made by the "Rana" was false. He, therefore, reopened the assessments after obtaining the previous approval of the Board in order to assess the income which had escaped assessments owing to the assessee's omission or failure, to disclose in the course of the assessment proceedings fully and truly all facts necessary for the assessments. The ITO, therefore, issued notices under Section 148 for reopening of the assessments and.served these notices on the "Rani" who was the legal heir of the late "Rana". These supplementary assessments were completed by the ITO by adding to the total income already assessed, the income from investments which had escaped assessment.;