TMI Blog1962 (3) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there were separate deeds of partnership. The assessee was assessed at Rangpur up to the assessment year 1942-43. The present reference relates to the assessment years 1944-45, 1945-46, 1946-47 corresponding to the accounting years, 1943-44, 1944-45 and 1945-46. Since the Income-tax Officer, Rangpur, had no jurisdiction for the assessment under the Excess Profits Tax Act, the records were forwarded to the Income-tax Officer, Central, Calcutta, on January 4, 1947. On March 9, 1948, the assessee's pleader was served with notices under section 23(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Officer for the production of accounts and other relevant evidence by March 20, 1948, for the assessment year 1944-45. The assessment was made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ention of the assessee.. The assessee, thereafter, went up to the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the assessee's objection to the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer related to the place of assessment and, therefore, did not entertain the objection to jurisdiction. It should be stated here that before the Tribunal the assessee contended that as to the assessment year 1943-44 the assessee had taken similar objection to the jurisdiction of the Income-tax Officer but the Tribunal held that it was an objection which related to the place of assessment. After the Appellate Tribunal passed the order on August 4, 1955, the assessee preferred an application under section 35 where the assessee contended that the objection did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s stated under section 3 that where before the appointed day the jurisdiction of a tax officer under the relevant tax Act (meaning thereby the Indian Income-tax Act or the Excess Profits Tax Act) has been altered in connection with the setting up of the Dominions of India and Pakistan, or where after the appointed day the case of an assessee is transferred from one Dominion to the other by agreement between the Central Boards of Revenue of the two Dominions, and by reason of such alteration of jurisdiction or transfer the case of an assessee falls to be dealt with on or after the appointed day by the tax authorities of India or as the case may be of Pakistan, all proceedings relating to the case pending before any tax authority of Pakistan, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as governed by the first limb of section 3 of the Indian Independence (Income-tax Proceedings) Order. In the present case the assessments related to the period before the appointed day. The income is derived from territories which were within British India as it stood prior to the appointed day. The jurisdiction of the revenue authority was there admittedly up to August 15, 1947. The question is whether by reason of the partition of India the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities of the Dominion of India ceased in respect of an assessee who was resident at the relevant time of the accounting period in British India as it then was and also derived income from British India as it then was. Counsel for the assessee contended that after Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by his residence and his income during the period of residence within the territories of the jurisdiction of the taxing officer. In the case of Whitney v. Inland Revenue Commissioners [1926] AC 37 (HL), Lord Dunedin said at page 52 of the report that there are three stages in the imposition of a tax. There is first the declaration of liability, that is the part of the statute which determines what persons in respect of what property are liable. Next, there is the assessment. Liability does not depend on assessment. That, ex hypothesi, has already been fixed. But assessment particularises the exact sum which a person liable has to pay. Lastly, come the methods of recovery, if the person taxed does not voluntarily pay. Counsel for the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee were Jalpaiguri and Siliguri which since the appointed date were within the Dominion of India. Counsel for the revenue authorities referred to the agreement for avoidance of double taxation of India and Pakistan which came into effect in the year 1947 in exercise of the powers conferred by section 49AA of the Indian Income-tax Act, section 11A of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, and section 18A of the Business Profits Tax Act, 1947. The taxes which are the subject of that agreement are the taxes imposed in the Dominions of India and Pakistan by the Indian Income-tax Act, the Excess Profits Tax Act and the Business Profits Tax Act as adopted in the respective Dominions. Under article 2 of that agreement it is contemplated that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
