RADHEY LAL MANNILAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred for our opinion by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is :

(2.) THE assessee is a registered firm which was carrying on dealings in iron and ore rolling mill. THE assessees previous year relevant to the assessment year 1945-46 was from that January 31, 1944, to the January 18, 1945. THE assessee under some orders of the Government of India had to cease production in the rolling mill on account of shortage of coal as a result of which the mill remained closed from the August 16, 1944, to the June 30, 1945. For this compulsory closure the Steel Rolling Mills Association of India on behalf of the assessee made representations to the Government of India for compensation. THE Government agreed to pay the compensation, and this consent of the Government to pay the compensation was communicated to the assessee firm by the letter dated the April 26, 1945, by the Steel Rolling Association of India. Subsequently by the letter dated the December 28, 1945, sent by the Steel Rolling Mills Association of India the assays was informed that the compensation would be paid at the rate of Rs. 2074-1-0 per month. Finally some time in November, 1946, a closure of the assessees rolling mill during the period from the August 16, 1944, to the June 30, 1945. By this time the proceedings for assessment of the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1945-46 had not yet been completed and consequently the Income-tax Officer sought to include the due of Rs. 25,978 in the taxable income of the assessee for the year 1945-46. It appears from the statement of the case that no objection was raised by the assessee on the ground that the sum of Rs. 25,978 was not assessable to income-tax at all. THE objection taken was that this amount could not be assessed in the assessment for the assessment year 1945-46. This contention raised by the assessee was rejected by the Income-tax Officer and the decision of the Income-tax Officer was ultimately upheld by the Tribunal. THEreupon at the request of the assessee the question mentioned above was referred by the Tribunal for our opinion under section 66(I) of the Income-tax Act. THE second part of the question appears to have been framed because of the plea taken by the assessee that this sum of Rs. 25,978 was assessable lie the proceedings for assessment for the year 1947-48.

(3.) REFERENCE answered accordingly.