HARRIES, C.J. - (1.) THIS is a reference made by the Assam Agricultural IT Board in compliance with an order of this Court dt. 5th March, 1946. The reference deals with the assessment of the Maharaja of Tripura to agricultural income-tax for the years 1942-43 and 1943-44. The facts giving rise to the reference can shortly be stated as follows. The income sought to be taxed is the agricultural income derived from the Chakla Roshanabad estate situate within the Province of Assam and which belongs to the assessee.
(2.) THE assessee was called upon to make a return of his agricultural income derived from properties within the Province of Assam for the year 1942-43 and an assessment was made but the assessee was assessed as an association of individuals. An appeal was preferred from this assessment and the AAC set aside the assessment and directed the Agricultural ITO to make a fresh assessment upon the Maharaja personally. Notice was served upon Babu Narendra Narayan Chowdhury to show cause as to why he should not be treated as the agent of the non-resident assessee, his Highness the Maharaja, for the purpose of assessment of agricultural income-tax on agricultural income derived from lands situate within the Province of Assam. THE ITO by an order treated the said person as the agent of the non-resident assessee and proceeded to assess him for the year 1942-43. Similarly an assessment was made for the year 1943-44. The assessee objected to the assessment for the year 1942-43 and moved the CIT for review under s. 27 of the Act, but the CIT rejected the petition. Thereupon the petitioner filed applications before the Assam Agricultural IT Board for referring certain questions of law arising out of the earlier orders to the High Court for its decision. The Assam Agricultural IT Board stated a case under s. 28 (2) of the Act referring three questions of law for the decision of the High Court. The matter came before Gentle and Ormond, J., and during the hearing the parties submitted a set of agreed questions and prayed for an order directing a fresh reference by the Board with its opinion on all such questions. The Board were directed by this Court to make a fresh reference on the agreed questions and this is the reference which is now before us.
(3.) THE five questions set out in the reference are as follows : (1) Whether the zemindary of Chakla Roshanabad is, as a matter of law, the property of the Tripura State or of His Highness the Maharaja of Tripura personally. (2) Is the income from Chakla Roshanabad State liable to tax under the Assam Agricultural IT Act by assessment upon the Tripura State or by assessment upon His Highness the Maharaja of Tripura personally or otherwise. (3) Whether the Assam Agricultural IT Act is ultra vires the Provincial legislature if and so far as it authorises the assessment upon the Maharaja of Tripura. (4) Whether r. 22 of the Rules under the Assam Agricultural IT Act is ultra vires the Government of Assam. (5) Whether the assessee is in law liable to be assessed as agent of His Highness the Maharaja of Tripura in his personal capacity or in his capacity as the ruler of the Tripura State. The most important questions are questions 1, 2 and 3 and I have already dealt with these questions in my judgment in IT Ref. No. 7 of 1943. In that judgment I have held that Chakla Roshanabad is not the personal property of His Highness the Maharaja of Tripura, but is property belonging to His Highness in his capacity as ruler of the State ; in other words, it is the property of the Tripura State and not the private property of the person who for the time being occupies the gaddee. I have further held that the income from Chakla Roshanabad is not liable to be taxed under the Assam Agricultural IT Act as upon a true construction of the Assam Agricultural IT Act it can have no application to income of an independent ruler or sovereign.;