(1.) Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Honble the Chief Justice
(2.) In the statement of the case made by the Appellate Tribunal it is suggested that the Commissioner of Income-tax has misunderstood the findings of fact arrived at by the Tribunal and stated in its order of 9 February 1943. We do not think that there has been any misapprehension on the part of the Commissioner, but in any event the facts are clear. Until the 28 March 1939 the assessee was joint with his father. The family carried on a money-lending business in the Federated Malay States. On separation, the assessee received as his share of the family assets the business which the family had carried on in the Federated Malay States. Between the 1 April 1933 and the date of partition this business had earned considerable profits, all of which accrued to the assessee under the partition. Between the 28 March 1939 and the 12 April 1939 the assessee brought to British India Rs. 40,742 of the accumulated profits and the Income-tax Officer decided that he was liable under Section 4(1) (b) (iii) of the Income-tax Act to pay the tax on this amount. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner disagreed with the Income-tax Officer and held that the assessee was not liable. The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the appellate Assistant Commissioner. At the request of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Tribunal has referred for the opinion of this court following question :-
(3.) Whether in the circumstances of the case the respondent is liable on the remittance of a sum of Rs. 40,742 brought by him into British India during the accounting year." Section 4(1) (b) (iii) reads as follows :- "Subject to the provisions of this Act, the total income of any previous year of any persons includes all income profits and gains from whatever source derived which having accrued or arisen to him with out British India before the beginning of such year and after the 1 day of April, 1933, are brought into or received in British India by him during such year."