JUDGMENT C.A. Vaidialingam, J. 1. In this writ petition, Mr. Balachandran, learned counsel for the petitioner, challenges the order of assessment to agricultural income-tax passed by the Junior Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Badagara, under Ext. P-1, dated 23rd September 1961, for the assessment year 1961-62 under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, Act XXII of 1950. 2. It is not really necessary for me to go into the various other grounds of attack that have been made as against this order in question, viz., that it is arbitrary and that the assessing authority has erred in not accepting the materials furnished by the assessee in support of the return. 3. But one aspect that has been very seriously pressed before me and which appeals to me is the attack levelled as against that order, that the assessing authority, when he proceeded on the basis that, under section 9 (2) (a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, he has got jurisdiction and power to take into account the income that must have accrued from the properties that have been transferred by the petitioner in favour of his three married daughters and their respective children, in computing the total income of the assessee, has acted illegally and without jurisdiction. 4. It will be seen that the petitioner sent a return of his agricultural income for the year in question as an individual. He had also indicated that under three registered documents bearing Nos. 773, 774 and 776 executed in 1959, he had gifted certain of his properties in favour of his three married adult daughters and their respective children. In consequence, in the return, he included only the total income which, according to him, has accrued to him from the properties, which were then in his exclusive possession and enjoyment. Quite naturally, he did not take into account the income from the properties that had been transferred to the three daughters and their children by virtue of the documents executed by him. 5. The assessing authority sends a pre-assessment notice under Ext. P-2, dated 12th September 1961. The officer states that the petitioner has not accounted for the income derived from " the properties gifted by you to the minors " as per the three gift deeds. The three gift deeds are referred to by the officer in Ext. P-2. 5. The assessing authority sends a pre-assessment notice under Ext. P-2, dated 12th September 1961. The officer states that the petitioner has not accounted for the income derived from " the properties gifted by you to the minors " as per the three gift deeds. The three gift deeds are referred to by the officer in Ext. P-2. The three documents referred to by the officer, are (1) document No. 773, dated 9th April 1959 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Perambra, in favour of his daughter Mandoth Cheeru Amma, and her four minor children. The extent of the property covered by this document is stated to be 5 acres 11 cents; (2) document No. 774, dated 9th April 1959 to another daughter of his, namely, Mandoth Madhu Amma and her three minor children and the extent of the land is 6.17 acres; (3) document No. 776, dated 29th April 1959 in favour of his third daughter, Madhavi Amma and her minor son, Ramakrishnan, and the extent of the properties comprised in the document is 4.33 acres. 6. The officer is of the view that the income from the properties gifted to the 'minor children' should be added to the petitioner's income for arriving at his total income under section 9 (2) of the Act. Pausing here for a minute, one should take it that the assessing authority when he used the expression "gifted to minor children " in the notice, Ext. P-2, is referring to the gifts effected by the petitioner to his three married adult daughters as well as the minor children those daughters. There is nothing in Ext. P-2 to show that the assessing authority has proceeded on the basis that there has been any transfer or gift made by the petitioner to any of his minor children. So far as the petitioner was concerned, the gifts executed by him were to his three adult married daughters and their children. The learned Government Pleader has also accepted the position that reference to "minors" and "gifted to minor children" occurring in Ext. P-2, has reference only to the minor grand children of the petitioner, i.e., the minor children of the three daughters of the petitioner and who are the legatees along with their respective mothers. That this is so, will be clear when I refer to the order of assessment, Ext. P-1. 7. P-2, has reference only to the minor grand children of the petitioner, i.e., the minor children of the three daughters of the petitioner and who are the legatees along with their respective mothers. That this is so, will be clear when I refer to the order of assessment, Ext. P-1. 7. Therefore, the view of the officer appears to be that the petitioner in his return should, under section 9(2) (a), have shown the income that has accrued to the minor children of his three daughters under the three registered documents referred to above. Ultimately, the assessing authority says that he rejects the income declared by him for the year 1961-62 and that he intends to proceed to compute the same on the basis of the results of his investigation and enquiries. 8. I do not think it necessary to go into the estimate that he has proposed in Ext. P-2 because though that itself is the subject "of an attack in this writ petition, that will have to be again re-investigated by the assessing authority in the light of the directions that are to be given by me presently. 9. The petitioner sends a reply, Ext. P-3, to the pre-assessment notice, Ext. P-2, sent by the assessing authority. In this reply, the petitioner categorically says that he has no minor children at all and that he has not executed any gift deed in favour of his minor children. On the other hand, he states that the transfers referred to in the pre-assessment notice, Ext. P-2, are all in favour of his adult married daughters aged about 35, 38 and 41 years and their respective children, and that each of the, daughters and their children to whom properties are given are in independent possession and enjoyment of the properties, paying land revenue and also appropriating the income for their own purposes. The petitioner, takes up the position that the income accruing to the minor children of his daughters or to the daughters, from the properties covered by those documents, will not in any way attract the provisions of section 9(2) (a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act in the matter of assessment of the petitioner as 'individual', as wrongly assumed by the assessing authority in his notice, Ext. P-2. P-2. He has also quite fairly stated that if he had executed any transfers in favour of his minor children, income from such properties can be properly included in his total income under section 9(2) (a) of the Act. He further states that he has no daughter by name Madhavi Amma as mentioned in Ext. P-2, and that document No. 776 is in favour of his daughter Kalyani Amma and minor son Ramakrishnan and that Kalyani Amma has for the identical period sent a return including the income from the properties covered by this document. 10. Ultimately, the petitioner also mentions about the various other objections that he has got to the proposals of the assessing authority under Ext. P-2. That reply, Ext. P-3, is dated 15th September 1961. 11. The assessing authority was not inclined to agree with the contention of the petitioner that section 9 (2) (a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act has no application in respect of the income that has accrued from the properties which are the subject of gifts by the petitioner in favour of his three married daughters and their respective children. The assessing authority is of the view in Ext.P-1 that 15.16 acres of land have been gifted by the petitioner to his three daughters and their minor children as per documents Nos. 773, 774 and 776, all of April 1959. It is the further view of the assessing authority that " the income from the properties gifted to minor children should be added towards his income as per section 9 (2) (a) of A.I.T. Act� On this basis, the officer states that he rejects the income declared by the petitioner and states - that he has issued a pre-assessment notice proposing the basis which he intends to adopt for the purpose of making an assessment. He also refers to the very strong objection made by the petitioner on the ground that the gifts of the properties referred to in the pre-assessment notice are gifts made by the petitioner to his three adult married daughters and their minor children and not to "his minor children ", as he has no minor children. He also refers to the very strong objection made by the petitioner on the ground that the gifts of the properties referred to in the pre-assessment notice are gifts made by the petitioner to his three adult married daughters and their minor children and not to "his minor children ", as he has no minor children. But anyhow the assessing authority is of the view that "it is a fact that the petitioner has gifted or assigned his properties to minors who are his grandchildren"; and in consequence he is further of the view that he cannot accept the contention of the petitioner that these transfers will not attract the provisions of section 9 (2) (a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. Ultimately, he takes into account the income that must, according to the officer, have accrued from those properties which are the subject of transfers in favour of the petitioner's married daughters and their respective children. 12. The officer appears to show some concession when he says that he will reduce the income to some extent regarding the income that may have accrued to those who have attained majority. 13. It is this order that is under severe attack at the hands of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 14. It is clear that according to the officer, under section 9 (2) (a), income accruing from property transferred by an assessee to his minor grandchildren, can also be taken into account in computing the total income of the assessee. The question is whether section 9 (2) (a) warrants this view. Further, the gifts in this case are to the adult married daughters and to their respective children. 15. In my view, the assessing authority has totally misunderstood and misapplied the provisions of section 9(2) (a) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. 16. Section 9 deals with "Income from settlement, disposition, etc; I shall omit to consider about section 9(1) as that sub-section has not been relied on in this case either by the officer or by the learned Government Pleader in this Court. 16. Section 9 deals with "Income from settlement, disposition, etc; I shall omit to consider about section 9(1) as that sub-section has not been relied on in this case either by the officer or by the learned Government Pleader in this Court. Section 9 (2) with al|, its sub-clauses is as follows : " (2) In computing the total agricultural income of any individual for the purpose of assessment, there shall be included (a) so much of the agricultural income of a wife or minor children of such individual as arises directly or indirectly (i) from the membership of the wife in a firm of which her husband is a partner ; (ii) from the admission of the minor to the benefits of partnership in a firm of which such individual is a partner ; (iii) from assets transferred directly or indirectly to the wife by the husband otherwise than for adequate consideration or in connection with an agreement to live a part; or (iv) from assets transferred directly or indirectly to the minor child not being a married daughter by such individual otherwise than for adequate consideration ; (b) So much of the agricultural income of any person or association of persons as arises from assets transferred otherwise than for adequate consideration to the person or association, by such individual for the benefit of his wife or minor child or both". Section 9(2) will apply only when the assessment is that of an individual. 17. It is needless to state that the words " assessee " [section 2 (d)] and " person " [section 2 (m)] are wide enough to cover not only an 'individual' but also a Hindu undivided family, association of individuals, Aliyasanthana family, Marumakkathayam tarwad, firm, company, etc., etc., But the world " individual" is narrower in its connotation, being one of the units for purposes of taxation. 18. The opening words of section 9(2) refer to "any individual'', whose total income has got to be computed for the purpose of assessment; and the words " minor child of such an individual " used in section 9(2) (a) can have reference only to that individual. That individual must be an assessee and it is in the computation of his total income for the purpose of assessment that the income of the persons mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of section 9(2) has got to be included. That individual must be an assessee and it is in the computation of his total income for the purpose of assessment that the income of the persons mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of section 9(2) has got to be included. Sub-clause (a) of section 9 (2) refers to two distinct sets of persons bearing a relationship with "such individual", the assessee. One is a wife and the other is a minor child. The case of the wife is dealt with in sub-clauses (i) and (iii) and the case of the minor child is dealt with in sub-clauses (ii) and (iv). Sub-clauses (ii) and (iv) which deal with a ' minor child' use the words " such individual ", in relation to the minor child, whose income, under the circumstances mentioned therein, has to be included in computing the total income of " such individual ", for the purpose of assessment. I am leaving out of consideration sub-clause (b) of section 9(2) because neither the officer, in his order, nor the Government Pleader in this court, has relied on the same. In fact, the view of the officer, is that section 9 (2) (a) applies and the learned Government Pleader also supports this stand. Even , if section 9 (2) (a) applies, the only sub-clause that can be, if at all, called into aid, will be sub-clauses (ii),and (ii) can have no application in this case because there is no question of any admission of any minor to the benefits of partnership. So the only other sub-clause that can, if at all, assist the officer is sub-clause (iv) of section 9 (2). None of the donees, viz; the three daughters is a minor and each one of them is more than 35 years of age. In any event, all of them are married daughters having minor children. So section 9 (2) (a) (iv) will not apply to the gifts in favour of the three daughters. It can, if at all, apply only to the, gift to the minor children of the daughters. Even here, if section 9 (2) (a) (iv) applies, an investigation will have to be made as to the legal incidents of the gift deeds, whether the gift is to the Thavazhi or as to whether the daughters and children are given separate rights, etc. Even here, if section 9 (2) (a) (iv) applies, an investigation will have to be made as to the legal incidents of the gift deeds, whether the gift is to the Thavazhi or as to whether the daughters and children are given separate rights, etc. But that is unnecessary because I am of the view that section 9 (2) (a) (iv) has no application at all. In fact, section 9 (2), in my view, has application only to the minor children of the assessee-individual. That is the assessee-individual must be in the position of the father and " minor child " must be the son or daughter of that assessee-individual. 19. As only section 9 (2) (a) (iv) has been relied on, I will re-write the sub-section and the sub-clause. As so re-written by me, section 9 (2) (a) (iv) will run as follows : " Section 9 (2) (a) (iv) : In computing the total agricultural income of any individual for the purpose of assessment, there shall be included so much of the agricultural income of a minor child of such individual as arises directly or indirectly from assets transferred directly or indirectly to the minor child not being a married daughter of such individual otherwise than for adequate consideration. " The assessing authority proceeds on the basis that section 9 (2) (a) will give him jurisdiction to include income from properties that have been transferred by the individual in favour of his minor grand-children, (viz.,) children of his daughters also. 20. I have already dealt with the scheme of section 9 (2) with special reference to sub-clauses (ii) and (iv) of section 9 (2) (a). The manner in which I have re-written section 9 (2) (a) (iv) will also show that the minor child, must be the minor child of such individual, the assessee. Again sub-clause (iv) uses the definite article ' the ' when it refers to ' minor child ' and the transfer must be by "such individual". All these clearly show that the expression, child, bears its ordinary meaning of "son" or "daughter." of " such individual", viz., the "assessee". Daughters' children cannot be called the children of the petitioner, the grandfather. 21. At this stage, I may state that the Supreme Court in I.T. Commissioner v. Sodra Devi A.I.R 1957 S.C 832. All these clearly show that the expression, child, bears its ordinary meaning of "son" or "daughter." of " such individual", viz., the "assessee". Daughters' children cannot be called the children of the petitioner, the grandfather. 21. At this stage, I may state that the Supreme Court in I.T. Commissioner v. Sodra Devi A.I.R 1957 S.C 832. had to consider, as to whether the expression " individual" occurring in section 16 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 [corresponding to section 9 (2) of the Act in question], takes in only the male of the species or the female of the species also and ultimately held that it takes in only the male of the species. In the case before me, no such controversy arises, because the petitioner is a male and I have had no occasion to consider such a question. 22. In my view, there is absolutely no jurisdiction in the officer under these circumstances to invoke the provisions of section 9 (2) (a); and the income that has accrued by, virtue of the transfers cannot certainly be considered to be income from assets transferred directly or indirectly by an individual " to the minor child of such individual " in the circumstances of this case. The gifts are gifts to petitioner's daughters and to his grandchildren. 23. The expression " minor child of such individual " occurring in section 9 (2) (a) is very significant because the transfer by the individual must be " to the minor child of such individual " and it has no application to the transfer, if any, that may have been made by such an individual to his grandchildren, who cannot certainly be considered in law to be the " minor children of such individual ". 24. In this case, the assessing authority, as I mentioned earlier, is of the view that because of the fact that the transfer of the properties is in favour not only of his married daughters but also of their minor children, he is entitled to invoke the provisions of section 9(2) (a) (iv) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act. The expression "to the minor child" occurring in clause (iv) of section 9(2) (a) must have again relation to " the minor child of such individual " occurring in section 9 (2) (a) of the statute Agricultural itself. The expression "to the minor child" occurring in clause (iv) of section 9(2) (a) must have again relation to " the minor child of such individual " occurring in section 9 (2) (a) of the statute Agricultural itself. Therefore, it will be seen that when the assessing income-tax Officer, authority has taken into account the income that must have accrued to the minor children of each of these daughters, by virtue of the transfer effected by the petitioner, he has taken into account the income not of "the minor child of such individual ", namely, the individual whose total income is being computed, but really the income of minor grandchildren of such individual for which he has absolutely no jurisdiction. The assessing authority in the order itself says : "anyway, it is a fact that he has gifted or assigned his properties to minors who are all his grandchildren " 25. On this ground, the order under attack will have to be set aside and the officer is directed to take up the question of making a fresh order of assessment for the period in question, having due regard to the directions and observations contained in this order. 26. The status of the petitioner is beyond controversy, namely, that of 'individual'. I have also made it clear that there is no question of any transfer of assets either directly or indirectly by the petitioner to any of his ' minor children' and therefore section 9 (2) (a) of the Act has no application. The transfer, if at all, are to the grandchildren of the petitioner and his three adult married daughters and that will not attract the provisions of section 9(2) (a) of the Act, as I have already held. 27. Eliminating the income that must have accrued from the 15.16 acres of land which are the subject of gifts under documents Nos. 773, 774 and 776, the assessing authority will consider what the total income of the petitioner from the properties owned by him is for purposes of assessment. That total income is to be fixed having due regard only to the properties which are in his possession and enjoyment in his own right and the properties covered by the transfer deeds referred to above must be excluded for the purpose of arriving at the total income of the petitioner. That total income is to be fixed having due regard only to the properties which are in his possession and enjoyment in his own right and the properties covered by the transfer deeds referred to above must be excluded for the purpose of arriving at the total income of the petitioner. 28 .In the fresh assessment that is to be made, it is open to the petitioner to urge that the materials and documents that he intends to rely on in support of his return are to be accepted by the assessing authority. These are all matters for the assessing authority to consider and take into account before a fresh order of assessment is made. 29. Subject to these observations and directions, the writ petition is allowed and the order under attack is set aside. The parties will bear their own costs.