TMI Blog1961 (7) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred and the refusal of the High Court to call for a statement of the case from the Tribunal on questions which the Tribunal refused to refer to the High Court. The appeals are, therefore, within the rulings of this court in Chandi Prasad Chokhani v. State of Bihar [1961 (4) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court] and Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax,[1961 (4) TMI 5 - SUPREME Court] and must be regarded as incompetent. Appeal dismissed. - - - - - Dated:- 17-7-1961 - Judge(s) : S. K. DAS., M. HIDAYATULLAH., J. C. SHAH JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by HIDAYATULLAH J.----These appeals with special leave were filed by one Kanhaiyalal Lohia, who died during the pendency of the appeals, and who is now r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prasad Chokhani v. State of Bihar and Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, these appeals were maintainable, if the two decisions of the High Court had become final. Mr. A. V. Viswanatha Sastri relied upon the decisions in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Baldev Singh's case and pointed out that in those cases, appeals were entertained from the Tribunal's order, though he conceded with his usual frankness that special circumstances must exist. He contended that this was a case in which such circumstances existed. We shall deal with the appeals from that point of view, because unless special circumstances exist, the appeals must be regarded as not competent, in view of our recent rulings above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e partnership both under section 22(2) and section 34, and the partnership also applied for registration under section 26A of the Income-tax Act, which was granted. The partnership was also assessed for the years, 1945-46 and 1946-47. The assessment of Kanhaiyalal Lohia was completed by the Income-tax Officer, Non-Companies Income-tax cum Excess Profits Tax District, and during the assessment for the year, 1945-46, a notice was issued under section 22(4) of the Income-tax Act on August 24, 1949, calling for accounts of the head office at Calcutta and also the branches including the business being carried on as " Brijlal Nandkishore ". Kanhaiyalal Lohia proved the above facts, producing the books of account, bank statements, registration cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e gifts were not proved by the assessee by unimpeachable evidence, and that the income of " Brijlal Nandkishore " was rightly included in the assessment. As stated already, applications under section 66(1) and section 66(2) were made to the Tribunal and the High Court respectively. The Tribunal referred one question, but declined to refer the other questions. The High Court was then moved under section 66(2) but without success. The High Court agreed with the Tribunal, and answered the question which was referred, against Kanhaiyalal Lohia. Before the High Court, Kanhaiyalal's counsel, Dr. Pal, admitted that he could not persuade the court to answer the referred question against the department, and it appears that it was conceded by the dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred, and under article 136, if the High Court refuses to call for a statement. In the present case, the order of the High Court on the question referred was not brought before this court by the ordinary mode indicated in the Indian Income-tax Act, presumably because of the concession of counsel that he could not claim that the question be answered in favour of the assessee and the attitude of the department that the assessment of " Brijlal Nandkishore " would be cancelled. The order refusing to call for a statement on questions other than the one referred is also not questioned before us. The attempt is to bring this case within the ratio of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills' case, and in support, it has been pointed out mainly that the exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch of the principles of natural justice. The order sheets of March 29 and 30, 1950, clearly record the absence of Mr. B. Sen Gupta. In our opinion, there is no breach of the principles of natural justice in this case to entitle the appellants to invoke the ruling in Dhakeswari Cotton Mills' case. It was contended before us that the finding of the Tribunal was perverse, and that, on an examination of the total circumstances, it is quite clear that the gifts were not only real, but were acted upon. This was a matter within the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal as the final fact-finding authority. The Tribunal acted within its powers in refusing to accept the evidence tendered, and looking at the circumstances of the case, we cannot sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
