9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (3) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to as the assessee) who has filed this appeal, was, at all material times, residing in Bombay. She was a shareholder, holding 760 shares of Mafatlal Gagalbhai & Co. Ltd., Bombay. For the assessment year 1950-51 (the previous year being the calendar year 1949), she was assessed to income-tax on a total income of Rs. 1,50,765, which included a grossed-up dividend income of Rs. 1,47,026. In the latter income was included a sum of Rs. 47,120 being the dividends declared by Mafatlal Gagalbhai & Co. Ltd., Bombay. Mafatlal Gagalbhai & Co. Ltd. is a private limited company with its registered office at Bombay. It was, at all material times, "resident and ordinarily resident" in British India. It was also doing business in the former Baroda Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... da State. The Tribunal pointed out that the dividends were declared by Mafatlal Gagalbhai & Co. Ltd. out of its profits which had accrued partly in, what was then called, British India and partly in the Indian State. The dividend was thus declared out of "composite profits". It further pointed out that the assessee had paid for and acquired the shares of a company in British India and was thus holding an asset in British India, and that the income was from that asset. The Tribunal, however, at the instance of the assessee drew up a statement of the case under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, and referred the following question to the High Court : "Whether the net dividend income of Rs. 47,120 accrued to the assessee in the form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court to frame and deal with a question of law not arising out of the order of the Tribunal. The assessee points out that the Tribunal had decided that the income had accrued in British India. The assessee had challenged this part of the decision, and if the Commissioner felt it necessary, he should have obtained the decision of the Tribunal and asked for a reference on the other point also. Since the Tribunal had not gone into the question of the applicability to the assessee of the Concessions Order and had not expressed any opinion thereon, the assessee contends that the High Court could not raise the question on its own, and decide it. The assessee strongly relies upon a decision of this court in New Jehangir Vakil Mills Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal. Thus, though the result is the same so far as the assessment is concerned, the grounds of decision are entirely different. The High Court felt that the question framed by it comprehended both the aspects and, perhaps it did. But the two matters were neither co-extensive, nor was the one included in the other. The question of accrual of income has to be decided under the Income-tax Act, and has but little to do with the Concessions Order. That question can be adequately decided on the facts of this case without advertence to the Concessions Order. It cannot, therefore, be said to be either co-extensive with or included in the decision of the question actually considered by the High Court to wit, whether the Concessions Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wrong was in not deciding both the limbs but one of them and that too, the one not decided by the Tribunal. The resulting position can be summed up by saying that the High Court decided something which the Tribunal did not, and the Tribunal decided something which the High Court did not. This is clearly against the provisions of section 66. The respondent referred to Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Commissioner of Income-tax v. Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust, and Ismailia Grain Merchants Association v. Commissioner of Income-tax. They were all decisions of the same court, and arose in different circumstances. In two of them, the question was wide enough to take in a line of reasoning not adopted by the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
