TMI Blog1967 (4) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usiness in the town of Hyderabad, which was carried on till May, 1948. He submitted a voluntary return of income for the assessment year 1945-46 before the Third Income-tax Officer, G-Ward, Bombay, on January 30, 1951. The Income-tax Officer accepted the claim of the assessee that he was a non-resident during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1945-46 and assessed him accordingly. In November, 1951, the assessee commenced trading in Calcutta in the Province of West Bengal. The assessee was assessed as resident and ordinarily resident in British India by the Income-tax Officer, District II(2), Calcutta, under section 23(4) read with section 34 for the assessment year 1945-46, and under section 23(3) read with section 34 for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tment to prove that every essential ingredient to make the assessee resident was satisfied in the present case ? (2) Is there any evidence and/or material upon which the Tribunal could hold that the assessee was a resident in British India during the relevant previous year? (3) Does an occasional or casual visit in connection with the assessee's business make the assessee resident within the purview of section 4A(a)(iii) ? " The High Court recorded answers to the first two questions in the negative, and declined to answer the third question. The Commissioner of Income-tax has appealed against the decision of the High Court on the second question. There is no appeal before us by the assessee against the answer to the first question. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce with the Income-tax Officer, and also before the Tribunal, that he had visited British India in the two previous years, but he pleaded that his visits were " occasional or casual ". The Tribunal had to determine the truth of that plea. The assessee addressed a letter to the Income-tax Officer on February 14, 1955, regarding his assessment for the year 1945-46 stating : " ... In the year under assessment I had never been to British India and, hence, I do not come under the jurisdiction of the Indian Income-tax Act in the said year as I had no income in India at that time. ... Please also note that during the year in question I made no remittance to India and, hence, your query as to whether the remittance relates to a remittance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had again visited Nagpur in November-December, 1946, because of his mother's illness. He denied that he had visited Bombay in connection with his business. He admitted that an amount of Rs. 12,000 was sent in cash to Indo-Europa Trading Company in connection with the purchase of machinery, but he claimed that the money was sent with his cashier, Patwardhan. Called upon to state whether he had any evidence to show how the money was sent to Indo-Europa Trading Company, the assessee stated that he " can call " Patwardhan and the Tribunal " can put questions " to Patwardhan. He asserted that he had no business transactions in Bombay in the year 1946. The Tribunal in its order observed : " We have had the advantage of having had the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e gathered from the circumstances in which the assessee paid the visit, and his conduct. Accidental presence in or a visit for a social purpose to the taxable territory may be regarded as occasional or casual, but a visit in connection with the business carried on by the assessee may not normally be regarded as occasional or casual. The assessee carried on the trade of a printer in Hyderabad. He had in connection with that trade to deal with business houses in Bombay ; this was admitted by the assessee. He had made remittances to Bombay in both the years---the first remittance was by a bank draft and the second in cash. The assessee denied that he visited Bombay during the two previous years, but that part of his testimony was disbelieve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the taxable territory is occasional or casual, obviously he is not a resident. If the question is intended to open an enquiry whether the visits of an assessee to the taxable territory in connection with his business may in certain circumstances be regarded as occasional or casual, we do not think it arises out of the order of the Tribunal and we do not propose to enter upon that enquiry. The third question does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal ; it does not relate to the facts of the case, and is again abstract and hypothetical. The appeals are therefore allowed. The order passed by the High Court is set aside. The Commissioner will be entitled to his costs in these appeals. One hearing fee. Appeals allowed - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
