LAWS(SC)-1960-11-13

INDORE MALWA UNITED MILLS LIMITED IN ALL APPEALS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL BOMBAY IN ALL APPEALS

Decided On November 19, 1960
INDORE MALWA UNITED MILLS LTD. Appellant
V/S
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (CENTRAL) BOMBAY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by:

(2.) THESE appeals arise out of proceedings for assessment of income-tax of the appellant Company (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) for the assessment years, 1943-44, 1944-45, 1945-46, 1946-47, 1947-48 and 1948- 49, the relevant accounting years being the Calendar years, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947 respectively.

(3.) THE question is whether on these facts the profits of the assessee, a non-resident, in respect of the supplies were received by the assessee in British India and, therefore, taxable under s. 4(1) (a) of the Indian Income- tax Act, 1922. Before the Appellate tribunal and at all stages of the assessment proceedings, the contention of the revenue authorities wag that the profits were received at Bombay where the. cheques on the Reserve Bank of India, Bombay were encashed. By its order dated 13/03/1953, the Appellate tribunal negatived this contention, and held that the amounts of the cheques were received by it at Indore. On the application of the Commissioner of Income- tax, central Bombay under s. 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the tribunal by its order dated 4/03/1955 referred the following question of law to the Bombay High court: 'Whether the assessee Company is liable to pay tax in the taxable territories on the ground that the sale proceeds, which included the profit element therein, were received in the taxable territories ?' In its order dated 4/03/1955, the tribunal referred to the decision of this court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kirloskar Bros. Ltd.(1) decided on 19/04/1954, and stated that on the facts of the case, a contention might arise that the assessee had requested the government to send the cheque by post and the post office as the agent of the assessee, had received the cheques in British India, but the tribunal pointed out that this contention had not been raised before it.