9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (11) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Khairagarh State which was, before its merger in December, 1947, with the old Central Provinces and Berar, one of the Chhatisgarh States. The assessee is also a member of the Indian Police Service and is at present holding the post of District Superintendent of Police. On 18th November, 1943, Shri Birendra Bahadur Singh, who was then the Ruler of the Khairagarh State, made an order with regard to the grant of a monthly allowance to the assessee. The order was as follows : "Whereas it is expedient to increase the allowance of Rajkumar Bikram Bahadur Singh and to give him certain privileges, according to the customs and tradition in vogue in the State consequent on his marriage, it is hereby ordered as follows : (i) With retrospective effect from 9th July, 1943 (the date of his wedding), the Rajkumar Sahib's allowance is fixed at Rs. 800 per month. In case he takes up an appointment outside the State, with a view to enable him to meet the extra expenses at an outside place, his monthly allowance will be raised to Rs. 1,000. (ii) As has already been decided, as soon as the war is over, a sum of Rs. 15,000 should be spent for the extension of the Devi Bhawan, according to the choi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n under paragraph 13(iii) of the Merged States (Taxation Concessions) Order, 1949, and it was for the assessee to prove that the assessee was the subordinate chief of the Ruler of Khairagarh State. In this connection, the assessee has produced a certificate from the ex-Ruler of Khairagarh State, but for the reasons mentioned by the departmental representative the same is not of much evidentiary value. If the assessee could produce a certificate from the Khairagarh State the assessee could have produced some acceptable evidence from the Ruler of Khairagarh showing conclusively that the assessee was the subordinate chief of that Ruler and that the allowance was made to the assessee in the capacity of a subordinate chief of the Ruler and the same was paid immediately before 1st August, 1949. Inasmuch as no evidence worth the name to prove that the assessee was a subordinate chief of the Ruler of Khairagarh State and that the allowance was paid to him in that capacity by the Ruler immediately before 1st August, 1949, is forthcoming the claim of the assessee for exemption of the allowance from taxation cannot be allowed and the same is hereby rejected." The answer to the question place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal all missed the point that the amount of allowance received by the assessee was not a pension amount. They assumed that it was a pension amount. Again, the amount of allowance of Rs. 12,000 paid to the assessee was not received by him as the subordinate chief of the Ruler of the Khairagarh State. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal seemed to think that the assessee was not a subordinate chief of the Ruler as he was not "next to the Ruler in point of succession and a son was born to the Ruler some time before 1st August, 1949". This construction put on the words "subordinate chief" by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal is altogether erroneous. As is evident from paragraph 13 of the Order, it is concerned with the grant of exemption from tax on the privy purse of the Ruler, sums received by the widow or mother of he Ruler as maintenance allowance and any pension paid to a subordinate chief of the Ruler. In construing paragraph 13 the historical circumstances in which the amounts spoken of in paragraph 13 came to be paid to the persons concerned cannot be ignored. If thos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State Government after the merger regarding the payment of Rs. 1,000 per month as political pension for a subordinate chief. However, I have been drawing this pension before the merger of the State out of State revenue, and the same amount is still being paid out of the State revenue, as allowance in the nature of khorposh or a political pension, and I come within the definition of subordinate chief, being only blood-brother of the Ruler of Khairagarh, who was an heir-presumptive of the Khairagarh State till the birth of the their apparent." This letter plainly shows that the stand of the assessee was that the allowance of Rs. 1,000 per month was paid to him because he was the blood-brother of the Ruler and further that as he was the heir-presumptive till the birth of a son to the Ruler, he was a "subordinate chief". The assessee was obviously under a mistaken impression in thinking that his blood relationship with the Ruler gave him the status of a subordinate chief. In our judgment, there is no material whatsoever to show that the amount of Rs. 12,000 which the assessee received was paid to him as the subordinate chief of the Ruler of the Khairagarh State. There is also nothing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
