Judgment :- P.JYOTHIMANI, J. 1. The Revenue is the appellant. These tax case appeals are directed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras B Bench dated 3.4.2002 made in ITA Nos.2749 and 2750/Mds/1992 for the assessment years 1989-1990 and 1990-1991, and the same were admitted on the following questions of law: "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in treating the assessee as individual and not as association of persons? and 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income of the trust have to be aggregated and the maximum marginal rate has to be applied on the income attributable to each beneficiary? 2. The Tribunal, in the impugned order, has held that in respect of cases covered under Section 80L of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity, "the Act"), the deductions are admissible, especially in cases where the issue relates to the discretionary trust and the shares of the beneficiaries are ascertained. Ultimately, while concurring with the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Tribunal has found that such net income as in the hands of each beneficiary requires to be aggregated and the maximum marginal rate should be applied. 3. The issue relates to the representative assessee as per Section 160(1)(iv) of the Act, which is as follows: "Section 160. (1) For the purposes of this Act, representative assessee means— (i) to (iii) *** (iv) in respect of income which a trustee appointed under a trust declared by a duly executed instrument in writing whether testamentary or otherwise [including any wakf deed which is valid under the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act, 1913 (6 of 1913),] receives or is entitled to receive on behalf or for the benefit of any person, such trustee or trustees" 4. By dint of the inclusion of Section 161(1A) of the Act with effect from 1.4.1985, it has been made clear that the tax is chargeable in the hands of the representative assessee to the maximum marginal rate. Section 161(1A) of the Act is as follows: "Section 161. Liability of representative assessee. By dint of the inclusion of Section 161(1A) of the Act with effect from 1.4.1985, it has been made clear that the tax is chargeable in the hands of the representative assessee to the maximum marginal rate. Section 161(1A) of the Act is as follows: "Section 161. Liability of representative assessee. (1) *** (1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any income in respect of which the person mentioned in clause (iv) of sub-section (1) of section 160is liable as representative assessee consists of, or includes, profits and gains of business, tax shall be charged on the whole of the income in respect of which such person is so liable at the maximum marginal rate: Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply where such profits and gains are receivable under a trust declared by any person by will exclusively for the benefit of any relative dependent on him for support and maintenance, and such trust is the only trust so declared by him." 5. In fact, it was originally while considering Section 80L of the Act, in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Venu Suresh Sanjay Trust and others, (1996) 221 ITR 649, this Court while referring to a catena of decisions on this issue, including G.Murugesanand Brothers v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1973) 88 ITR 432 (SC), has held that while determining the total income of a trustee who is an individual, the individual trustee is entitled to deduction under Section 80L of the Act. In the said decision, it was held as follows: "The determination of total income depends on the various provisions of the Income-tax Act which takes into consideration the deductions to be provided under section 80L of the Act as well. The charge of tax comes into play after the income has been determined in the manner stated above. In the present case, the trustee is an individual. His status, therefore, has to be adopted as that of an individual and from his individual income the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80L of the Act. On the income so computed the tax has to be charged in view of the provisions contained in section 164(1) treating such income as if it was the income of an association of persons or at the rate of 65 per cent, whichever was more beneficial to the Revenue. On the income so computed the tax has to be charged in view of the provisions contained in section 164(1) treating such income as if it was the income of an association of persons or at the rate of 65 per cent, whichever was more beneficial to the Revenue. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80L of the Act. In view of the foregoing discussions, we consider that the Tribunal was correct in granting relief under section 80L of the Act. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the assessment years under consideration in the affirmative and against the Department." 6. After the advent of Section 161(1A) of the Act, the issue has been settled by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Manoranjitham Thanga Maligai Trust, (2003) 260 ITR 143, wherein the person referred to has been held to be the individual beneficiary and not association of persons, in the following words: "That the trustee is to be assessed is evident from the language employed in that provision. The person referred to therein is the person mentioned in section 160(1)(iv). The Tribunal was, therefore, in error in holding that the assessment should be on the beneficiary only and not on the trustee. The reference made in the question to a decision rendered by the Bench in the case of another trust was a decision which required the assessment to be made on the assessee even in respect of the business income, even after the introduction of section 161(1A)." 7. In view of the categoric finding rendered in the above said judgments, which is in conformity with the impugned order of the Tribunal, we answer the first substantial question of law in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 8. Insofar as it relates to the second question of law, which is connected with the first question of law, the specific issue came to be discussed by the Kerala High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. T.A.V.Trust, (2003) 264 ITR 52, wherein again by referring to Section 161(1A) of the Act introduced by the Finance Act, 1984 and by considering that the said provision starts with a non-obstante clause, it was held that the profit and loss receivable under a trust has to be individually assessed in the hands of the trustee. The Kerala High Court has held as follows: "This sub-section opens with a non obstante clause under which where any income in respect of which a representative assessee is liable consists of, or includes, profits and gains of business, tax shall be charged on the whole of the income in respect of which such person is so liable at the maximum marginal rate. However, under the proviso to the said sub-section profits and gains receivable under a trust declared by any person by will exclusively for the benefit of any relative dependent on him for support and maintenance and such trust is the only trust so declared by him are excluded from the applicability of this sub-section." 9. Therefore, the legal issues decided by the precedents are in favour of the assessee, as in the case of the representative characters the assessment shall be in respect of the individual beneficiaries to the maximum marginal rate, which is, in fact, as per the provisions of the Act extracted above. Accordingly, the second substantial question of law is also answered against the Revenue. In fact, the entire issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the impugned order and we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeals stand dismissed. No costs.