9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (8) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment of the court was delivered by HEGDE J.-- These appeals by certificate arise from the decision of the High Court of Delhi in, a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which will be hereinafter referred to as " the Act ". The controversy in these appeals relates to the assessment of the assessee-appellant for the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,50,000 per financial year. Provided that the aforesaid rate of Re. I per 100 sq. ft. will be operative so long as the selling rate of unpolished slabs does not exceed Rs. 10 per I00 sq. ft. In the event of the selling rate going above this figure the royalty per 100 sq. ft. shall be increased by 25% of the excess over ten rupees. (ii) The minimum royalty will be payable in four equal ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ground that it was given in lieu of income-tax, super-tax and excess profits tax. At the instance of the assessee the Tribunal submitted the following question to the High Court of Delhi under section 66(1) of the Act. " Whether the payment of royalty in excess of the aforesaid minimum is deductible under section 10?" This question has to be understood in the light of the controversy b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in view of section 10(4) of the Act. It is conceded at the Bar that there was no law imposing income-tax or super-tax or excess profits tax in the State of Kotah during the relevant years. That being so, there was no question of the excess royalty being made to pay in lieu of income-tax or super-tax or excess profits tax. If that is so then the excess royalty paid cannot be in lieu of income- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
