SHAMNATH MUSHRAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to us is as follows :

(2.) THE asseasee was an Assistant Solicitor employed in the Legislative Department of the Government of India. He was appointed the Legal Remembrancer of the Bikaner State on 14th September 1933. In the assessment year 1939-40 he was treated for purposes of assessment as a resident of British India. In the year 1940-41 it was held, however that he was a nonresident. In the year 1941-42 the question arose whether the assessee was or was not a resident of British India.

(3.) COMING back now to these visits, learned counsel for the Department has said that the visits to Allahabad and Lucknow in October 1940 would not be casual but might be occasional. The two words more or less overlap, although there is a shade of difference in their meaning. The word 'occasional' has in it an implication of multiplicity, but what is casual may also be occasional. We do not see why the visits in October 1940 to Allahabad and Lucknow for the purposes of meeting the relations and friends of the assessee could not be deemed to be either casual or occasional. Similarly, the visit to Lucknow during the Christmas week for eye-treatment was a casual or occasional visit as it was limited to a specific occasion that had arisen by reason of the eye trouble.