A.K. Mathur, C.J.

1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), at the instance of the assessee and the following two questions have been referred by the Tribunal for answer by this court :

"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding even with the aid of Section 292B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, that the reassessment proceedings were valid when the notice under Section 148 was issued in the name of a dead person and was served upon a person not shown to be authorised on behalf of the legal representatives of the assessee

2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income of Smt. Kaushalyabai could be legally and validly included in the income of her husband, Vishandas, under Section 64 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 "

2. For the convenient disposal of this case, brief facts may be given as under : Assessment for the years 1975-76 to 1980-81 was completed on the return filed by the assessee, Vishandas. Subsequently, the Income Tax Officer noticed that the share income of Smt. Kaushalyabai, the wife of the assessee, which was includible in the assessees hands under Section 64 of the Act, had escaped assessment. Therefore, proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Act. The assessee expired on January 12, 1981. Notices under Section 148 of the Act for all the six years were issued on March 3, 1981, and received by Shri C. B. Tahliyani for Vishandas. Smt. Kaushalyabai, the widow of the deceased, filed returns for these six years under protest. Notices under Section 143(2) were not responded to and the Income Tax Officer completed the assessment for all the six years under Section 144, read with Section 147 of the Act. The assessee, Vishandas, gifted Rs. 20,000 to his wife, Kaushalyabai, which was invested by her in the firm, Sachdev Sari Centre, Bilaspur, which was a partner of the firm. The Income Tax Officer held that the share income earned by Smt. Kaushalyabai from the said firm was includible in the income of the assessee. Thereafter the widow of the assessee, as a legal heir of Vishandas, filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and took the plea that the reassessment proceedings were initiated on the dead person and the entire proceedings should be held to be void. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the contention and thereafter the matter was taken up in appeal before the Tribunal which also negatived the contention. Hence, the aforesaid two questions have been referred for answer by this court.

3. So far as the first question is concerned, it is now academic for the simple reason that the widow of the deceased has already participated in the proceedings notwithstanding the fact that notice was issued in the name of the dead person. We are of the opinion that in the present case whether the issue of notice on a dead person under Section 292B of the Act should be treated to be a procedural irregularity or whether it is a nullity, is academic since the widow of the deceased has already participated in the proceedings, this legal issue need not be decided in the present case. However, the very fact that the widow of the deceased-assessee has participated in the proceedings, the defect, if any, stands automatically cured. Hence, this question is answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

4. With regard to the second question as to whether the income of Smt. Kaushalyabai, the spouse of the assessee, should be includible in the income of the deceased or not, we have examined the finding of the Tribunal. We are of the opinion that on the basis of the material placed on record, the Tribunal has found the income of the widow to be includible in the income of the assessee. There is no reason to take a different view from the one taken by the Tribunal. Hence, this question is also answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

5. The reference is accordingly disposed of.