- (1.) THIS reference has been made by the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in R.A. No. 46/Jp/1987 arising out of the ITA No. 1178/Jp/1985 pertaining to asst. yr. 1972 -73 to this Court referring following questions of law for the opinion of this Court: 1. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not annulling assessment order and notice of demand for the asst. yr. 1972 -73 when the assessment order and notice of demand were made in the name of a dead person ? 2. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not followed decision of the Supreme Court reported in CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff : (1963) 48 ITR 59 (SC) cited at the time of hearing ? 3. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not annulling the assessment order and notice of demand on account of insertion of Section 292B in the IT Act, 1961 ? 4. Whether the learned Tribunal was right in law in not annulling the assessment order because of not bringing on records all the four legal representatives by the ITO particularly when the ITO was aware of there being four legal representatives of the deceased, Shri Jagannath Sharma ?
(2.) SO far as question No. 4 is concerned, we have already deliberated question in D.B. IT Ref. No. 93 of 1987 titled as -Smt. Kesari Devi v. CIT, Jaipur and three other connected references in the cases of the assessee pertaining to asst. yrs. 1975 -76, 1976 -77 and 1977 -78 and to that extent the said judgment relating to these assessment years shall be applicable for the purpose of answer to this question. So far as question No. 3 is concerned, learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Tribunal in application of the law contained in Section 292B of the IT Act, 1961 was not correct, therefore, he does not press this question.
(3.) QUESTION Nos. 1 and 2 are inter -dependent questions. The authorities under the IT Act while deciding the assessment of the assessee pertaining to asst. yr. 1972 -73, the judgment of the Supreme Court in para 2 has not been properly applied. Therefore, question Nos. 1 and 2 shall be answered conjointly.;