9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (9) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred to as "the Act"), of fitness of the case for an appeal to the Supreme Court. The question raised in the reference out of which this application arises was framed as follows : " Whether, on a true interpretation of section 4, sub-section (3)(viii) of the Income-tax Act, the sum of Rs. 20,000 received by the assessee as remuneration was revenue income liable to tax under the Indian Income-tax Act ?" The answer of a Bench of which one of us (i.e., Beg J.) was a member, is in Malick v. Commissioner of Income-tax. It is true that, in order to give our opinions on the particular facts of the case of the assessee, who happened to be a former Chief Justice, this court had to interpret the provisions of section 4 of the Income-tax Act. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me this difficulty after perusing the tentative opinion of the other. Thus, the case did present us with some difficulties in arriving at the interpretation we finally reached as better than other possible interpretations of section 4(3)(viii) of the act. We had also dissented from some of the observations of the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. V. P. Rao and had also distinguished that case on facts. A decision of the Calcutta High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kamal Singh Rampuria was cited on behalf of the department. In this case, after a review of a number of authorities on the question, twelve classes were given (at pages 538 to 539) of the types of cases in which certification under section 66A(2) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n future, no question deserving a certificate of fitness of the case for an appeal to the Supreme Court arose. In reply, it was contended for the department that the illustrations given, in a passage cited in Mishrimal Gulab Chand's case, of questions of wide public importance, such as, "those relating to religious rites and ceremonies, to caste and family rights, or such matters as the reduction of the capital of companies as well as questions of wide public importance in which the subject-matter in dispute cannot be reduced into actual terms of money", were of a type which was not likely to arise at all under the Indian Income-tax Act. Hence, it was suggested that the test of fitness of a case for certification under section 66A(2) o f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Privy Council, which were also applicable to cases falling under section 109(c), Civil Procedure Code (e.g., Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Radhakrishna Aiyar v. Swaminatha Aiyar) were relied upon. Indeed, the Privy Council had also held in Delhi Cloth Mill's case, with regard to certification under section 66A(2) of the Act, that "the High Court is justified in refusing a certificate in a case which in its view does not raise any question of such importance as would warrant a certificate under section 109(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908." In India Machinery Stores' case, the Supreme Court held : " It is true that under section 66(1) and (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preme Court. But, in the instant case, there is no evidence at all that the question of the taxability of the amount of Rs. 20,000 in a particular year is of great private importance to the assessee before us. It is not a question which could possibly arise in the case of the assessee in every year. There is nothing to indicate the consequences of the assessment of this particular sum in a particular year on the assessee's private interests, or means. We are not even apprised of the amount of tax which the assessee would have to pay if this item of Rs. 20,000 was added to his income in the particular year. Moreover, such a submission does not seem to us to be even available to the department which is only concerned with the effect of a deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of "wide public importance". It has not been shown to us that the question of interpretation of section 4(3)(viii) of the Act has arisen in either a large or even in an appreciable number of cases of assessment. Indeed, beyond the possibility of the question arising in other cases, we are not informed of any other case in which such a question has arisen or is pending consideration in this court or elsewhere. Therefore, it cannot be said that the question raised is one which has been shown to affect assessees in general. It seems to us that it can only affect exceptional cases of assessees. It may be that, if these very questions had been shown to arise or likely to arise frequently in assessments, they could be held to be of wide public ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
