Chakravartti, C.J. - (1.) The main question involved in this Reference is a simple one, but certain facts of history bound up with it tend it an appearance of difficulty and at the same time make it interesting.
(2.) The assessee is the Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad and the Reference is concerned with his assessment for the four assessment years 1944-45 to 1947-48. For each of those years the Nawab Bahadur of Murshidabad has been assessed on a certain amount as his income from property, on a second amount as his income from a certain Imambara and on a third amount as his income from forest produce. As regards his income from other sources, he has been allowed collection charges at the rate of 12 1/2 per cent. His contention is that he is not liable to be assessed on any income from property at all, because he is not the owner of the properties which have been taken into account, that the Imambara is held under a trust wholly for religious purposes and, therefore, the income derived from it is exempt from taxation, that the income from forest produce is agricultural income and that the rate at which collection charges have been allowed is unduly low. On the above contentions, four questions have been referred to this Court. I shall take them one by one.
(3.) The first question reads as follows : "Whether on the above facts and in the circumstances of this case the income of the properties styled as 'State Properties' is not liable to-be taxed under Section 9, Income-tax Act?". The question is based on a misconception. Although at the one time there were certain properties which were given the name of 'State Property', there are no such properties at the present moment. All properties which were once called State Property and other properties purchased with the sale proceeds of jewels from a certain stock of jewellery are now of the same class and their incidents are the same. If there be other properties purchased with the personal income of the Nawab Bahadur or with money provided by him from other sources, the same are not within the ambit of the question.;