These appeals by Revenue claim that assessee should be assessed in status of HUF. admitted facts are that there was HUF consisting of Subburaman and his son Shivanath. Shri Subburaman died on 2nd Nov., 1962 and by intestate succession half share of his properties devolved on his son, his daughter and his widow. In view that there was no actual partition of assets among legal heirs, WTO sought to assess entire wealth together treating them as AOP'. AAC found that WT Act does not provide for assessment in status of 'AOP', and, therefore, assessments were not correct. He also considered alternative contention of WTO that by invoking s. 19A assessment should be made on executor in respect of entire property, devolving on death of Subburaman. But AAC found that since date of death assessments have been made separately in hands of legal heirs and, therefore, there could not be assessment of entire property. He also noticed decision of Supreme Court in case reported in Gurupad Khandappa Magdum vs. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum & Ors. (1981) 129 ITR 440 (SC) which states that there is real partition on death of coparcener by operation of law and legal heirs can only be tenants in common thereafter. He was, therefore, of opinion that there cannot also be assessments in status of HUF and he accordingly cancelled assessment. In these appeals, contention of Revenue is that there was originally assessments in status of HUF in respect of entire properties in asst. yr. 1970-71 and until that HUF is partitioned and such partition is recorded, there could not be separate assessment. But this argument falls to ground when we see assessment made for asst. yr. 1971-72 in which ITO himself has stated that assessment made for earlier year in status of HUF was not correct and correct legal position was that share of each of legal heirs had to be assessed separately in their own individual hands. Therefore, even for preceding assessment year there is no assessment of all properties in status of HUF which revenue could depend on to claim that same status should be continued. In any event, in view of decision of Supreme Court there is no HUF existing having entire property of deceased as its property and which could be assessed as such. In circumstances, we find no merit in these appeals of Revenue. Hence, they are dismissed. *** SECOND WEALTH-TAX OFFICER v. S.V.S. SIVANATH