9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (2) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment year 1960-61. The assessee was a firm of partnership with 9 partners and carried on business as forest coupe contractors with head office at Ambasamudram and branch offices at several other places within the State of Madras, now Tamil Nadu. The partnership was governed by a deed dated January 25, 1959, which provided, inter alia, for one or more of the partners taking contracts in their name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... policy and so void. As to the second ground, the Tribunal, after scrutinizing the evidence, could not discover any proof of the existence of any activity like rigging and knock-out syndicates. The Tribunal, therefore, rejected this ground. It declined to accept the other ground as well, on the view that there was nothing in the Forest Act which prohibited exploitation by the firm of coupe contrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal was right in the view it expressed, and the questions should be answered in favour of the assessee. So far as the ground based on alleged rigging and knock-out is concerned, it is concluded by the factual finding of the Tribunal, which we are not prepared to reopen for the purpose of this reference. On the other ground, which is reiterated for the revenue, we have examined the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... specific reference has been made, no doubt, prohibits the contractor from disposing of or subletting the right of exploitation or any part thereof without the written permission of the specified officer. But the infringement of this clause may, at best only amount to a breach of contract, not an illegality from the standpoint of the provisions of the Forest Act. The question in each of these ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
