COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. VISWANATH BHASKAR SATHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT appear that the assessee, during the year of assessment, which was the year ending March 31, 1936, owned a ginning factory in Dhulia, and he was a member, with the owners of other ginning factories, of a pool. The Commissioner finds as a fact, that during the year of assessment the factory of the assessee was not actually employed in the work of ginning; and presumably it was not so employed under some arrangement made by the pool, although I have not been referred to any clause of the pool agreement under which factories of some of the members Can be closed. But under clause 16 of the agreement, it is provided as follows :-

(2.) IN order to entitle the parties hereto to keep their respective shares in the said pool as mentioned in clause 7 hereof, they shall keep and maintain at Dhulia during the continuance of this agreement his or their gins or other working plant with the machinery appertaining thereto as they exist at the date of this agreement and shall at all times at their own expenses keep the same in good repair and condition and in working order and shall no not during the said term remove or permit to be removed any such gi gins or machinery at Dhulia to any other place or places : Provided always that any of the parties hereto shall be at liberty if they so desire to close his or their factory or factories and dispense with his or their staff and workmen for any period during the contract period, retaining nevertheless his or their right to receive his or their share in the said pool."

(3.) IN my opinion, the question raised must be answered in the negative. We allow the assessee costs on the original side scale.