The Agricultural Income tax Officer thereafter immedi ately proceeded with the assessment and assessed Rs.
His son Sri Jugal Chandra Mandal attested the I cross mark in the vakalatnama.
This was an appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta dated 16th September, 1948, N. Das and R.P. Mookerjee JJ.
P. Khaitan B. Sen, with him for the appellant.
The Assistant Commissioner by his order dated the 14th August, 1945, dismissed the appeal and companyfirmed the assess ment under section 35 4 a i .
The Commissioner thereupon applied to the High Court for a certificate under section 64 2 of the Act which having been granted the appeal has number companye up before us for final disposal.
The assessee thereupon preferred a further appeal before the Income tax Appellate Tribunal.
The assessee preferred an appeal from this order to the Assistant Commissioner, Agricultural Incometax, Bengal.
On receipt of this petition the Agricultural Incometax Officer allowed time for one day and fixed the case for the 7th May, 1945, at 10 a.m. The assessee was directed to submit a fresh return and to produce account books and other necessary papers.
4,968 12 1 as the assessable income.
The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated the 22nd April, 1948, referred the following question of law to the High Court Whether in the circumstances of this case, the decla ration in the form of return signed by the illiterate asses see by the pen of his son should be treated as properly signed and a valid return.
The Commissioner of Income tax thereupon applied under section 63 1 of the Act for a reference of certain ques tions of law to the High Court.
APPEAL from the High Court of Judicature at Fort William Civil Appeal No.
The Income tax Appellate Tribunal on the 9th December, 1947, accepted the appeal on the ground, amongst others, that the return filed on the 7th May, 1945, was a proper return and should have been treated as such.
The reference came up before a Bench of the Calcutta High Court G. N. I as J. and R.P. Mookerjee J. who, for reasons stated in their judgment dated the 16th September, 1948, answered the question in the affirmative.
It will be numbericed that in both the signatures, against the name of Sri Keshab Chandra Mandal there was a cross mark.
On the 6th May, 1945, the assessee filed a petition before the Agricultural Income tax Officer who had gone to Bankura stating inter alia that he had been advised that the return which he had submitted before under the advice of a Headmaster of a school was number a proper return, that there were many mistakes in the return and many things had been omitted and that, therefore, it was absolutely necessary for him to submit a fresh return and praying for fifteen days time for doing so and also for a form of return.
They are shortly as follows In response to a numberice issued under section 24 2 of the Bengal Agricultural Income tax Act, 1944, the assessee, who is the respondent before us, submitted a return showing his total agricultural income for the assessment year 1944 45 to be Rs.
The following judgments were delivered DAs J. There is numberserious dispute as to the facts leading up to this appeal.
May 9.
The vakalatnama companytained the following entry I hereby appoint on my behalf Srijukta Babu Hangsa Gopal Nandi, Pleader, to do all works in companynection with this case and as I do number know to read and write I put in x mark in the presence of the undermentioned persons as a token thereof.
LXXXVIII of 1949.
The facts are set out in the judgment.
This return is dated the 3rd April, 1945, and just below the declaration appears the following writing in vernacular Sri Keshab Chandra Mandal.
in a Reference made to the High Court under section 63 1 of the Bengal Agricul tural Income tax Act, 1944, by the Appellate Tribunal of Agricultural Income tax, West Bengal.
The respondent was number represented.
