1981 (2) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cted by the assessee on account of a royalty payable to the State Govt. However, on a challenge by some of the brick-kiln owners, it was held by a Full Bench decision of this court in Amar Singh Modi Lal v. State of Haryana, AIR 1972 P & H 356, that no royalty was payable to the Government unless a certain procedure was followed. Because of that judgment, the assessee was absolved of its duty to pay the royalty and this amount was, consequently, added to the total income of the assessee. The assessee challenged the order of the ITO before the AAC as well as the Tribunal on the ground that the amount in question collected by the assessee from various customers during the accounting year were being held by the firm in trust for the said cust .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ount in the balancesheet dated September 7, 1971. It was because of this order that the prayer of the assessee in the application under s. 256(1) of the Act to get the following question of law referred was also declined: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the royalty collected by the petitioner and held not payable to the Government in view of the decision in AIR 1972 P & H 356 is taxable as income for the assessment year 1971-72 ? " This led to the filing of Income-tax Case No. 18 of 1976 under s. 256(2) for the issuance of a mandamus directing the Tribunal to refer the said question. So far as the prayer for a mandamus is concerned, as is evident from the fact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sales tax in the State Exchequer, because it took the position that the statutory provision creating that liability upon it was not valid, nor refund it to the persons from whom it had been collected. On these facts, it was held that the sum of Rs. 32,986 realised as sales tax by the appellant in its character as an auctioneer formed part of its trading or business receipts and that the fact that the appellant credited the amount received as sales tax under the head " Sales tax collection account " did not make any material difference. It was further observed that it is the true nature and quality of the receipt and not the head under which it is entered in the account books as would prove decisive and, if a receipt is a trading receipt, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X