JUDGMENT

M.C. Dsai, C.J. - This is case referred under section 24(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Income Tax Act by the Revision Board at the assessees instance, the question requiring this courts answer being :

Whether on the facts and having regard to the provisions of section 25 of the Act, the Board could on the 15th October, 1952, direct a fresh assessment to be made ?"

The facts as they appear from the statement are as follows h: The gross agricultural income of the assessee is of more than one lakh of rupees and the Collector and not the Sub-divisional Officer is his assessing authority : vide section 14. Section 15(3) lays down that "in the case of any person whose total agricultural income is, in the opinion of the assessing authority, such amount as to render such person liable to payment of agricultural Income Tax in any years, he may be served in that year a notice in the proscribed form requiring such person to furnish within such period, not being less than thirty days as may be specified in the notice, a return in the proscribed form setting forth his total agricultural income during the previous years." If the assessing authority is satisfied that return made under section 15 is correct and complete it is to assess the agricultural income of the assessee and determine the tax payable by the person. If it finds the return to be incorrect or incomplete it should serve on the person a notice requiring him to attend its office or to produce evidence on a certain date and the it should pass an assessment order assessing the agriculture income and determining the tax payable by the person. If the person fails to make a return or fails to comply with the notice issued under sub-section (2) or to produce evidence under sub-section (3) of section 16 it is required to make the assessment to the best of its judgment. This is the gist of section 16. There is some difficulty in giving effect to the provisions of section 16(3) and 14(2). Who is an assessing authority depends upon the gross income but what is the gross income can be determined only when it is assessed under section 16 after the issue of a notice under section 15(3). The notice under section 15(3) is required to be issued by the assessing authority; it is not understood how, before it is known what the gross agricultural income of the assessee is going to be, it can be said whether a Sub-Divisional Officer is the assessing authority or the Collector and how without its being determined at this stage who is going to be the assessing authority a notice can be issued at all. However, in this case a notice under section 15(3) was issued by a Sub-Divisional officer of the assessment year 1356 Fasli. He found that the gross income of the assessee was of more than one lakh and still assessed him on May 14, 1949, though on the net amount of Rs. 72,000 and odd. On December 23, 1949, the Collector issued a notice contemplated by section 25 to the assessee stating that some income of his had remained un assessed. This provision reads as follows :

"25. If for any reason any agricultural income has escaped assessment for any year the assessing authority may, at any time within one year of that year, serve on the person liable a notice and may upon service of such notice proceed to assess or reassess such income, and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply according as if the notice were a notice issued under section 15(3) and (3B)." The assessee contested the notice and the Collector assessed him on June 9, 1950, on a certain additional income. He appealed to the Commissioner against the assessment order and on March 5, 1952, the Commissioner allowed the appeal, held that the assessment orders passed by the Collector on June 9, 1950, and by the Sub-Divisional Officer on May 14, 1949, were without jurisdiction, set them aside and ordered that the "whole case shall be reopened by the Collector and fresh assessment of the whole of the income for 1355 F.