| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1963 SLG 3566 = 1963 SLD 3566 = 1963 PTD 297 |
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal No. 407 of 1958, decided on 7th November 1960.
Presented By: S. K. Das, M. Hidayatullah and J. C. Shah, JJ
A. V. Viswanatha Sastri (R. Ganapathiyer and G. Gopala krishnan with him) for Appellant. K. N. Rajagopal Sastri (R. H. Dhebar and D. Gupta with him) for
Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 407 of 1958, decided on 7th November 1960.
Presented By: S. K. Das, M. Hidayatullah and J. C. Shah, JJ
A. V. Viswanatha Sastri (R. Ganapathiyer and G. Gopala krishnan with him) for Appellant. K. N. Rajagopal Sastri (R. H. Dhebar and D. Gupta with him) for
Respondents.
PARSRAM PARUMAL
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL
Law:
Section:
Income------ ---Assessment at flat rate-Computation of total turn over of branch-Goods sent to other branches on commission. The assessee who was a dealer in gold and silver had his head office at Calcutta and branch offices at Bombay and Karachi. In the year of account, out of the sovereigns purchased in Bombay 1,66,188 sovereigns were despatched to the Karachi branch and the rest sold in Bombay. A commission of 2 as. per Rs. 100 was entered in the accounts in respect of the sovereigns sent to Karachi. In calculating the total turnover of the Bombay branch for assessing at a flat rate of profit, the Income-tax Officer includ ed also the sovereigns sent to Karachi. The Supreme Court directed the Tribunal to refer to the High Court the question whether there was any material to hold that the Bombay branch of the assessee had sold 1,66,188 pieces of sovereigns to the Karachi branch. JUDGMENT SHAH, J.-These are two appeals filed with special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution. Appeal No. 407 of 1958 is filed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, dated December 7, 195, refusing to state a case under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act,. 1922. Appeal No. 408 of 1958 is filed against the order of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta dated March 22, 1957, dismissing summarily an application under section 66 (2) of the Income-tax Act for a direction to the Appel late Tribunal to state a case. These appeals have been filed with special leave restricted to "the question relating to the transac tions in sovereigns only". In the course of the assessment pro ceedings before the income-tax authorities, diverse contentions were raised, but in view of the restricted leave, we will refer only to the "transactions in sovereigns from the Bombay branch" of the appellant and to no others. The appellant is a dealer in gold and silver and other com modities and has his head office at Calcutta. In the year of account Samvat year 2002 and 2003 (November 4, 1945, to October 3, 1946) corresponding to the assessment year 1946-47, he also carried on business at branch…