KAMLAPAT MOTILAL Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under article 226 of the Constitution the disposal of which has been delayed owing to an order directing that it be heard at the same time as in an income-tax reference with which it is now apparent it has very little connection.

(2.) THE petitioner is a firm which runs a sugar mill, and in its income-tax return of the year 1942-43 it claimed that a sum of Rs. 76,836, should be allowed as a deduction under section 10(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. THE relevant accounting year was from October 1, 1940, to September 30, 1941, and the firms case was that in the year preceding the accounting year it had sold 62,983 pounds of sugar, but as delivery of the sugar was given in the accounting year excise duty paid by the firm thereon amounting to Rs. 76,836 was a permissible deduction in the latter year. This deduction was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that it related to the sales effected during the preceding year. From that order the firm went in second appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which by an order dated the August 17, 1947, directed that the excise duty of Rs. 76,836 should be adjusted as an expenditure due and allowable for the earlier year of assessment, i.e., 1941-42. It is common ground that, for reasons upon which it is not necessary to enter, the direction of the Appellate Tribunal has not been carried out, and that the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, formally notified the petitioning firm in 1948 that he was unable to make any adjustment in accordance with the Tribunals order.

(3.) IN our opinion the petitioner has failed to establish a legal right to the relief which he seeks and this petition fails. It is accordingly dismissed with costs.