TMI Blog1989 (2) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of the deed of endowment dated April 28, 1896, the Tribunal was right in holding that the individual shares of the deities in whose favour the endowment had been made were not indeterminate or unknown and that accordingly the first proviso to section 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sments in those years came up for consideration before this court in the case of CIT v. Pulin Chandra Daw [1967] 63 ITR 179, 181, the question there being : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on a proper construction of the deed of dedication, dated 17th Baisakh, 1303 B. S. (28th April, 1896), the income from the properties covered by the said deed was assessable un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the Appellate Tribunal were right in holding that although the shares of the two deities are not defined in the deed of endowment, their shares are defined in law, that is, they are equal, and, therefore, the first proviso to section 41 is inapplicable ?" It was held that where the shares of the deities were indeterminate, the assessments should be made under section 41 of the 1922 Act at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e followed by the Tribunal. Mr. Moitra, appearing for the Revenue, has argued that there is material difference between the provisions of section 41 of the 1922 Act and section 164 of the 1961 Act, but in the context of the facts of this case, this argument is irrelevant. Hence, question No. 1 is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. In view of our answer to question No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
