9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (11) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad. The common question in the appeals before the Tribunal was whether for the relevant assessment years the respondent-assessee was entitled to exemption from the payment of income-tax as per the provisions of section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the "1922 Act"), and under section 11 read with section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "1961 Act"), in so far as they applied to the relevant assessment years. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the respondent-assessee's appeals for the assessment years 1949-50 to 1955-56 but it allowed the respondent-assessee's appeals for the assessment years 1956-57 to 1965-66 subject to the rider that the income derived from the trust property by the assessee will be exempt only within the limit permissible under section 11(1)(a) of the 1961 Act to the extent to which the income so accumulated is not in excess of 25 per cent. of the income from trust property or Rs. 10,000 whichever is higher, after the 1961 Act came into force. In other words, the rider applied to the assessments for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 1962-63 to 1965-66 ? (d) Whether, on the interpretation of various clauses of the trust deed even as amended by the second rectification decree dated May 10, 1955, the trust is void for uncertainty and was not a public charitable trust ? (e) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer was entitled to go behind the civil court decree dated May 10, 1955, in Suit No. 163 of 1954, and adjudge the validity of the rectification ? The Division Bench of the High Court after hearing the rival contentions canvassed by the parties answered all the referred questions in favour of the respondent-assessee and against the Revenue. It is under these circumstances that the Revenue through the Commissioner of Income-tax, Kanpur, having obtained special leave to appeal has preferred these 17 appeals. It may be noted at the outset that though the Revenue lost on all the referred seven questions before the High Court, in the present proceedings at the stage of final hearing Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned senior counsel for the appellant-Commissioner of Income-tax highlighted the grievance of the Revenue centering round the answers of the High Court on some of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deed. We will deal with the relevant recitals in the trust deed, in detail, at an appropriate stage in the latter part of this judgment. Suffice it to state at this juncture that one of the objects of the trust, as mentioned in paragraph 2(b) of the trust deed of 1941 was as under : " To erect, establish, equip, furnish, fit, maintain and repair on the said two plots of land, and any land that may hereafter be acquired by the trust. (1) residential quarters, chawls or buildings for the workmen and staff and other employees of the company or other allied concerns under the management or in which the directors of the company may for the time being be interested and for their respective families and dependents and for such other skilled and unskilled workmen, craftsmen, traders, merchants, technical or professional men whom the trustees may permit to reside or work in the said two plots with a view to supply their needs and requirements or to render them services or to cater to their wants comforts conveniences and amenities." Later on the settlor-company filed a suit being Suit No. 40 of 1945 in the Court of Civil and Sessions judge, Kanpur, under section 31 of the Specific Relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t clause 2(b)(i) of the trust deed held that it being a mixture of charitable and non-charitable objects, could not be treated to be creating a public charitable trust. In the meanwhile, the settlor-company had filed another suit being Suit No. 163 of 1954 in the Court of First Civil judge, Kanpur, for further rectification of the trust deed. It was reiterated in the plaint that the real intention of the settlor company was to create a public charitable trust for the benefit of the public in the city of Kanpur and the surrounding areas particularly, the members of the working class including the workmen employed in the plaintiff-company, but in their capacity as members of the working class. The intention, it was repeated, was to create the said trust wholly and exclusively for charitable objects and purposes. It was alleged that the trustees had, in fact, been giving the benefit of the trust to the members of the public and no part of the trust moneys had, at any time, been used for a non-charitable or non-religious object or purpose. It was contended that the said deed of trust even as rectified was less comprehensive than what was intended by the parties thereto at the time whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed all the appeals of the respondent. It is under these circumstances that the respondent-assessee approached the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as noted earlier. The assessee partly succeeded while the Revenue also succeeded in part before the Income-tax Tribunal and that is how seven questions came to be referred to the High Court under section 256(1) by the Tribunal, two at the instance of the assessee and five at the instance of the Revenue and which came to be wholly decided in favour of the respondent-assessee as already noted earlier. Rival contentions : Learned senior counsel, Dr. Gauri Shankar, raised the following contentions in support of these appeals : (1) The second rectification in the year 1955 as decreed by the civil court was without jurisdiction as in substance by the so-called rectification a new trust deed was sought to be substituted, which was beyond the powers of the civil court. (2) The condition precedent for invoking the jurisdiction of the civil court under section 26 of the Specific Relief Act of 1963 or under section 31 of the earlier Act that there should be mutual mistake on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Shri Gauri Shankar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue in the rejoinder submitted that 1945 rectification did not create a public charitable trust. He, however, fairly stated that as there was no clear indication from the judgment of the High Court about any colourable device on the part of the assessee or its trustees underlying the creation of the trust, he was not pressing that point any further. In the light of the aforesaid rival contentions the battle lines are clearly drawn between the contesting parties wherein the first five contentions canvassed on behalf of the Revenue by Dr. Gauri Shankar will have to be examined and the sixth and the last contention which arises for consideration in the light of the additional contention of learned senior counsel Shri Verma for the respondent, namely, whether the rectification of 1945 created a public charitable trust or not, will also fall for determination. We shall now deal with the aforesaid six contentions canvassed for our consideration seriatim : Contention No. 1 So far as jurisdiction of the civil court to grant rectification of the trust deed is concerned the relevant provision is found in section 26 of the Specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... senior counsel for the Revenue in the present case. On the facts of the case before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the City Civil Court, Hyderabad, had no jurisdiction under section 34 of the Trusts Act to bring about any changes in the objects of the trust which had become a public trust. On the facts of the present case section 31 of the 1877 Act (Specific Relief Act) or the corresponding provisions of section 26 of the 1963 Act could be effectively invoked for rectification of the instrument of the trust. Such a court does not suffer from any inherent lack of jurisdiction, like the City Civil Court in the Andhra Pradesh case which had no such jurisdiction under section 34 of the Indian Trusts Act. The first contention must, therefore, be rejected. Contention No. 2 So far as this contention is concerned it was vehemently contended by learned senior counsel for the Revenue that the civil court will get jurisdiction to entertain rectification proceedings provided any of the two conditions precedent are satisfied, namely, (i) through fraud ; or (ii) by mutual mistake of the parties the instrument in writing does not express real intention of the parties. So far as fraud is concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entertain such rectification proceedings. In this connection, it is profitable to have a look at the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Jagdamba. Charity Trust v. CIT [1981] 128 ITR 377. In that case the deed of trust was got rectified by the parties from the civil court. These proceedings had to be initiated in the light of the judgment of the High Court which had held that due to the provisions in certain clauses of the trust deed the trust was non-charitable and the trust was not entitled to exemption under the Income-tax Act and that since the decision had created some doubts regarding the validity of some clauses of the deed it was necessary that the deed should be rectified. The civil court granted a decree and directed that the trust deed be rectified. The question was whether such rectification order of the civil court was binding on the Income-tax Department when the assessee-trust armed with such rectification order claimed exemption from income-tax under section 11 of the 1961 Act. S. Ranganathan J., as he then was, speaking for the Delhi High Court, took the view that the word "instrument" used in section 26 of the Specific Relief Act has a very wide meani ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the income-tax authorities for claiming exemption under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the assessee-trust. In that case the original trust deed executed in August, 1948, did not bring out the real intention of the settlor to create a public charitable trust on account of certain sub-clauses of object clause No. 2. It was, therefore, felt necessary to rectify the mistake in the original settlement deed so as to put on record the true intention of the settlor and of the trust created by him. It was held by the Rajasthan High Court that it was permissible for the settlor to clarify his intention in creating the trust under the original settlement deed by executing the supplementary deed. Even in the original deed, a discretion had been conferred on the trustees to apply the income of the trust in rendering aid to persons belonging to the family and it was permissible for the trustees not to apply the income of the trust for the said object and in fact the income of the trust had never been applied for that object. It could not be said that the beneficiaries under clause 2(vi), namely, persons belonging to the family of L, had an enforceable right to the application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For all these reasons, therefore, it must be held that when such rectified trust deed is pressed in service before the income-tax authorities in the assessment proceedings concerning the relevant assessment years the Income-tax Officer will have to interpret such rectified instrument for finding out its correct legal effect. But it will not be open to the Income-tax Officer to refuse to look at such rectified instrument of the trust and to insist that the trustees of the trust should ignore the said rectified objects and should stick to the instrument as it existed prior to its rectification. The Income-tax Officer will have to take the instrument as it exists in its actual amended form when it is pressed in service for framing the assessment concerning the relevant assessment year in which such rectified instrument holds the field. The second contention, therefore, fails and is rejected. Contention No. 3 So far as this contention is concerned Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue, was right when he contended that the order of rectification by a civil court is not a judgment in rem. It would be a judgment in personam binding o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the concerned assessment years. The third contention is, therefore, decided by an swering that though the rectification orders of the civil court are not judgments in rem they are relevant in the assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer and will have to be given effect to for whatever they are worth. Contention No. 4 So far as this contention is concerned learned senior counsel for the Revenue is spared his pains as learned senior counsel for the respondent assessee fairly stated in the light of the debate that took place in the court that he was not supporting the answer given by the High Court in favour of assessee on question No. 2 referred for the opinion of the High court at the instance of the assessee-trust. In short, he submitted that he would treat the 1955 rectification of the instrument of trust as creating almost a new trust or substituting the new for the old and, therefore, he would not press that such rectification of 1955 would have any retrospective effect. In view of the fair stand taken by learned senior counsel for the respondent-assessee, this contention will have to be decided in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by holding that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hown on the plan annexed to the said indenture bearing date the 19th day of October, 1936, and thereon marked red as also the said plot of land situate at Kanpur and numbered as 2 in Block H Factory Workmen Area containing by admeasurement 26.30 (twenty-six decimal point thirty) acres more or less and more clearly delineated and shown on the plan annexed to the said indenture dated the 2nd day of February, 1938, and thereon marked red together with all way wells waters, water courses, sewers, ditches, drains, trees, shrubs, liberties, easements, profits privileges and appurtenances whatsoever to the said plots of land, respectively, belonging or in any wise appertaining with the same or any part thereof now or at any time heretofore usually held occupied or enjoyed therewith and all the state right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever at law or in equity of it was the company into or upon the said two plots of land and every part thereof to have and to hold the said two plots of land hereby conveyed granted or assured or expressed so to be and every part thereof unto and to the use of the trustees for ever to be by them held upon the trusts and with the subject to the powe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d two plots provided that the benefit in this clause shall be granted only to those persons who on account of poverty are in need of help and really deserve help. (ii) Public schools, pathshalas, colleges, libraries, public halls, hostels or boarding houses, (iii) Hospitals, dispensaries, museum, places of recreation, instruction, swimming baths, lakes, parks, play-grounds, temples, mosques, churches, a market or markets and such other works and institutions of general public utility. (iv) Such other works, building and installations as the trustees may in their discretion think fit to provide for the advancement of any other similar object of general public utility. (c) To erect, establish, equip, furnish fit, maintain and repair on the second of the aforesaid two plots a temple, a hospital with all necessary quarters for housing its staff, an off ice or offices for the management and administration of the colony or settlement to be established on the said two plots and quarters for the office staff and a water pumping station and similar other works. (d) To charge such rent or fees for the use and occupation of any of the said premises as the trustees may in their discretio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sible to agree with the aforesaid submissions of learned senior counsel Dr. Gauri Shankar, for the Revenue. The reasons are obvious. It cannot be said that the indicated beneficiaries, namely, the workmen in the town of Kanpur and surrounding areas and extensions are so vague as to make the object of the trust inoperative or otiose. The workmen in the town of Kanpur and the surrounding areas and extensions formed a clearly earmarked class or category of members of the general public and they were certainly a part and parcel of the general public. It is also not possible to countenance the submission that the words "surrounding areas and extensions of Kanpur town" introduced vagueness in the identification of the beneficiaries. Surrounding areas and extensions would naturally include those areas which are on the periphery of Kanpur town, and which are adjacent to Kanpur town. They would obviously not include any areas which are geographically far removed from and situated at a long distance from Kanpur town and which could not be said to be in the vicinity of Kanpur town. The words "surrounding areas and extensions of Kanpur town" indicate proximity of such areas with Kanpur town an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of any of the sub-classes of workmen in the town of Kanpur and they were likely to divert the entire benefit to their-own workmen. To say the least, it is merely a discretion left to the trustees and not an obligation of the trustees that they must necessarily spend the income of the trust for the workmen of the settlor-company itself and not for the benefit of any other outside worker. We shall deal with this aspect in greater detail when we will refer to contention No. 6 canvassed by learned senior counsel for the assesseetrust that even apart from the rectification of 1955 the earlier rectification of 1945 did create a public charitable trust. However, so far as the second rectification of 1955 is concerned, it has clearly indicated that only a discretion is vested in the trustees to utilise the trust income for the benefit of poor workmen in the town of Kanpur and in the surrounding areas and extensions and that may include even poor and needy workmen of the settlor-company itself. In this connection, Shri Verma also rightly invited our attention to section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure and clause 2(b)(i), sub-clause (b)(iv) whereby trustees in their discretion could pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... But as rightly submitted by Shri Verma, learned senior counsel for the assessee-trust, the said clause would not detract from the public charitable nature of the trust as projected by the relevant operative parts of the object clause to which we have made detailed reference earlier. Shri Verma was also right when he contended that if at all the trustees diverted the benefit to the beneficiaries other than the workmen of the company itself it would give a cause of action to the original vendor, namely, the Town Improvement Trust, which had taken no steps in all these years or made any grievance about the same and secondly as provided by the indentures themselves all that would result on account of any alleged breach of the conditions of the indentures on the part of trustees would be that they would be liable to pay an additional quantified amount to the original vendor and the concessional rate of consideration for the grant in that eventuality, may stand withdrawn. But it would not amount to any breach of trust on the part of the trustees if such benefit is conferred on outside workmen who fell within the clearly earmarked class of beneficiaries as per object clause 2(b)(i). On th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e rectified deed of 1955. Even that apart Shri Verma, learned senior counsel for the assessee, has invited our attention to various documents which are on record in Volume I of the paper book at pages 21, 28, 176, 179, 183 and 184 to indicate that in fact the benefit of the income from the trust was made available not only to workmen of the company but to outside workmen also who resided within Kanpur town. It was also submitted that the aforesaid documents clearly showed that the rent recovered from the workmen who occupied these 160 cottages put up by the settlor-company on the trust land was minimal and was highly subsidised as compared to the market rent. That water and electricity were given free to the beneficiaries and a part of the land was also made available to the municipality to establish a primary school. It was also contended that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal itself had noted in the common judgment from which the references arose, that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had himself conceded that no exorbitant rents were charged from the tenants who occupied the residential quarters in question and in fact the average rent recovered showed that the rents were on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as rectified in 1945 did create a public charitable trust. The main plank of his argument was based on the following premises : 1. Workmen in general and in particular of the company are also a part and parcel of the public and it cannot be said that they are not members of the general public residing in Kanpur. 2. We have to judge the correct connotation of the term "workmen in general" in the light of the economic and social conditions that prevailed in 1945 when the-deed was rectified. According to Shri Verma, construction of the residential quarters, chawls or buildings for the workmen in general and in particular or the workmen, staff and other employees of the company or other allied concerns under the management of or in which the directors of the company may for the time being be interested and for their respective families and dependents and for such other skilled and unskilled workmen, craftsmen, traders, merchants, technical or professional men whom the trustees may permit to reside or work in the said two plots with a view to supply their needs and requirements or to render them services or to cater to their wants, comforts, conveniences and amenities, as enjoined b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erwise contractual obligation or even statutory obligation of providing welfare facilities and residential facilities to its own workmen who because of these facilities would work more efficiently for the company. Thus, there would be a quid pro quo between the settlor on the one hand and the beneficiaries, namely, the workmen and the employees of the company, on the other. That such a provision would detract from the real public charitable nature of the endowment. In the light of the aforesaid rival contentions on this issue, we shall now proceed to examine this moot question. Before we deal with these rival submissions, it will be profitable to have a look at the relevant recitals in the rectified trust deed of 1945. Clause 2(b)(i) of the deed of trust after the said rectification dated August 18, 1945, laid down amongst others, the following object : " To erect, establish, equip, furnish, fit, maintain and repair on the said two plots of land and any other land that may hereafter be acquired by the trustees on behalf of the trust (i) residential quarters, chawls or buildings for the workmen in general and in particular for the workemen staff and other employees of the company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had taken the view that if the main benefit of the settled property in trust had to go to charity, if the trustees were permitted to give preference to poor relations of the settlors the trust would remain a public charitable trust. In this connection, our attention was invited to the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Moosa Haji Ahmed [1964] 52 ITR 147, the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Board of Mutwallis to the Wakf Estate, Ebrahim Solaiman Saleji [1968] 69 ITR 758 and the three decisions of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Trustees of Seth Meghji Mathuradas Charity Trust [1959] 37 ITR 419 ; CWT v. Trustees of the J. P. Pardiwala Charity Trust [1965] 58 ITR 46 and CIT v. D. D. Deshpande [1976] 102 ITR 390. On the other hand, Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue, submitted that as the benefit is made available under the trust deed to workmen in general and in particular to the workmen, staff and other employees of the company it cannot necessarily be held that these workmen must be poor and needy as no such words are found in the clause. He submitted that any trust deed conferring benefit on an identified group of persons like workmen or employees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w the light of day. While interpreting the word "workmen in general" as employed in 1945 rectified trust deed, we have to sit in the settlor's arm chair with a view to visualising what was meant by the settlor-company when it used these terms in 1945, keeping in view the then prevalent socioeconomic conditions in this country. It is easy to visualise that workmen who were to toil for their existence would necessarily represent a class of needy persons requiring a shelter over their head. When the settlor-company in 1945 contemplated to construct residential quarters, chawls or buildings for workmen it necessarily meant to provide these facilities for a needy class of persons who could legitimately be presumed to be a class of downtrodden persons suffering from penury and want. The socio-economic situation prevailing in England treating workmen as not necessarily poor, cannot almost automatically be imported and applied for judging the economic status of the working class in India especially in 1945 when even the definition of "workmen" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, had also still to see the light of day. We, therefore cannot agree with the general proposition canvassed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany, it would refer to workmen in Kanpur town, even then the more substantial hurdle in the way of the respondent is projected by the fact that there is an obligation cast on the trustees to construct these residential quarters, chawls or buildings in particular for the workmen, staff and other employees of the company or other allied concerns under the management of and in which the directors of the company may for the time being be interested and for their respective families and dependents. In the light of the words "in particular " as found in this clause, Dr. Gauri Shankar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue, rightly submitted, that they represent a scheme of priority for workmen of the settlor-company and not a scheme of preference. In other words, the trustees are bound under an obligation to construct residential quarters, etc., first for the workmen or employees of the settlor-company or its allied concerns. They have no choice in the matter. They cannot in their discretion select an outside workman Is recipient of the benefit under the scheme of the trust deed. In effect, the general class of beneficiaries constituted by the words "workmen in general" gets whittled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey have to utilise the income for carrying out the four objects, and any member of the public who comes within these four objects would be qualified to receive the bounty of the settlor. If a member of the public also happens to be an employee of the Premier Construction Co. Ltd., it is open to the trustees to give him preference. Therefore, the trustees would not be guilty of committing any breach of trust if they selected for the bounty of the settlor such members of the public as did not fall in the category of employees of the Premier Construction Co. Ltd. That is the real test which we have got to apply. We must not assume that the trustees will exercise their discretion dishonestly or improperly. The test is whether-the exercise of the discretion of the trustees is so fettered that they are bound to select particular persons in preference to others. That is clearly not the case here. " In our view the aforesaid is the correct test evolved by the High Court. Applying the said test to the clause in question we find that though residential quarters, chawls or buildings are to be constructed for the workmen in general and who, as we have already shown earlier, may be a well-defi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cers, members of the staff and other employees of those concerns. Anyone from the secretary or some other highly paid member of the staff down to the lowest menial may be included within the benefit of this fund. Necessitous circumstances might include the case of a superior employee earning some thousands of rupees per month, who owing to some misfortune--say the burning down of his house, or the loss of his property--might find himself suddenly in necessitous circumstances, and in need of money to replace his lost property. The learned judge could see no reason why the administrators of the fund should not be in a position to make a grant to such a person to make up his loss. It might be a most desirable thing to do and the administrators might justly think that they had used some of the funds to the best advantage. But such use cannot be said to be for the relief of poverty. Even if (as had been argued) the administrators are bound to use this fund solely "to relieve persons suffering from indigence, ill-health or other necessitous circumstances it was impossible to say that the fund is to use the words of the section property held in trust wholly for charitable purposes." A Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and needy, still as the trustees are enjoined to construct residential quarters, chawls or buildings in particular for the workmen, staff and other employees of the company it follows that other employees of the company who are the beneficiaries may not necessarily be poor or needy or affluent. We, therefore, concur with the second part of the reasoning of the Allahabad High Court in the aforesaid judgment though we are not in a position to subscribe to the general proposition that construction of residential colonies for workmen in general cannot by itself be regarded as an object of public charity. As a result of the aforesaid discussion, therefore, it must be held that rectified clause 2(b)(i) of the 1945 deed fell short of projecting an object of a public charitable nature and it could not be said that under the rectified deed of 1945 the trust properties were held by the respondent-trust wholly for religious or charitable purposes. It is, of course, true that the rest of the sub-clauses of clause 2(b) did refer to charitable objects but as one of the objects was not of a public charitable nature it could not be held that the entire trust was wholly for religious or charitable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f wholly charitable nature. (iii) For the assessment years 1962-63 to 1965-66, the income derived from the trust properties by the respondent-trust will be entitled to exemption from income-tax under section 11 of the 1961 Act subject to compliance with the conditions laid down therein as even during this period the rectified trust deed of 1955 as interpreted by us will be treated to have held the field. Final Order : In the light of the aforesaid discussion and the conclusions to which we have reached the questions referred for the opinion of the High Court will stand answered as under : Questions referred at the instance of the assessee in Income-tax Reference No. 18 of 1973 : Question No. 1 : Answered in the affirmative in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Question No. 2 : Answered in the affirmative in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee as the answer of the High Court on this question was not supported by learned counsel for the respondent. Questions referred at the instance of the Revenue in Income-tax Reference No. 715 of 1972 : Question No. (a) : Answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue as answer of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
