COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. C P SYNDICATE NAGPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under s. 66(1) of the Indian IT Act, referring the following two questions at the instance of the CIT. They are :

(2.) THERE are two provisos to s. 24(1). Neither the statement of the case nor the appellate order of the Tribunal specifies any of them. Since the first proviso disallows set -off of loss and since that proviso was specifically considered in the decision relied on by the Tribunal, we take it that the first proviso was intended. The question is otherwise not happily worded. The words "having regard to" should have appeared in place of "under" in this question. In order to bring out the true meaning we reframe the question thus :

(3.) THE last portion of the second question, viz., "in spite of the fact that no income, profits or gains from the Indian State had been received in British India" is not borne out by the statement of the case; nor has it any basis on the record. As is apparent from the order of the ITO for the assessment year in question, a sum of Rs. 29,352 was added as income from the Indian State brought into British India. This amount was included in the total income of the assessee under s. 16(1)(a) for the preceding assessment year. It appears that on the day this statement of the case was prepared there was another case before the Tribunal in which the income from the Indian State was not received in British India. Since the two questions referred to here arose in that case, the addition to this second question was made evidently through inadvertence.