COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts are set out in my referring order and need not be restated.

(2.) NOW, identically this very matter cap up for consideration before a Bench of the Bombay High Court consisting of Chagla, C. J. and Tendolkar, J. in Keshavlal Premchand v. Commr. of Income-tax, Bombay, (1957) 31 ILR 7: (AIR 1957 Bom 20), and after examining the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and bearing in mind the principles relevant for determining the proper function of a proviso, the following view was expressed:

(3.) AS we are of the opinion that the view which was already been clearly and cogently expressed in unexceptional, we would answer the question referred to us in the negative. The Commissioner of Income-tax shall be entitled to costs which are assessed at Rs. 250/-.