9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (3) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year 1956-57 was Rs. 10,54,686 and not Rs. 3,24,849 as taken by the Income-tax Officer. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, after verifying the figures, directed the Income-tax Officer to modify the assessment and the Income-tax Officer did so accordingly. The next point raised before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was regarding the set-off of losses. On behalf of the assessee it was submitted that, in the assessment year 1950-51, the total loss was Rs. 21,21,141, out of which in the assessment order dated April 26, 1960, for the assessment year 1959-60, the Income-tax Officer had set off unabsorbed loss of Rs. 1,58,845 for 1949-50 and Rs. 5,70,952 for 1950-51 against the business income of that year. It was urged that in this order the Income-tax Officer had directed that the balance of unabsorbed loss for 1950-51 amounting to Rs. 15,50,187 should be carried forward for the subsequent year. On the basis of the said order, which, according to the assessee, had become final, these losses which have been directed to be carried forward by the Income-tax Officer in respect of the assessment year 1950-51 should also have been set off against the current year's business in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... speculative transactions, it shall be set off only against the profits and gains, if any, of any business in speculative transactions carried on by him in that year ; (ii) where the loss was sustained by him in any other business, profession or vocation, it shall be set off against the profits and gains, if any, of any business, profession or vocation carried on by him in that year : provided that the business, profession or vocation in which the loss was originally sustained continued to be carried on by him in that year ; and (iii) if the loss in either case cannot be wholly so set off, the amount of loss not so set off shall be carried forward to the following year and so on :' ; (2) after clause (e) of the proviso, the following clause shall be inserted, namely :-- '(f) a loss arising in the previous years for the assessment for the years ending on the 31st day of March of the years 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944 shall be carried forward for one, two, three, four and five years respectively, and a loss arising in the previous years for the assessment for the years ending on the 31st day of March of the years 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948 and 1949 shall be carried forward fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submissions that a right had accrued to the assessee to carry forward and set off the loss for an unlimited period by the Act of 1955. The Tribunal has stated that the legislature had the right to amend the law and in the absence of any express direction to the effect that the amendment was meant to have retrospective effect, the law had to be interpreted as it stood at the relevant period and no other meaning than what was clearly apparent from the plain reading of the Act itself could be imported. The Tribunal held that the Finance Act, 1957, which restricted the assessee's right to carry forward losses for not more than 8 years, was valid and supported the decision of the authorities below who had refused to set off the unabsorbed losses sustained in 1950-51 against the assessee's business income for the assessment year 1960-61; The following question of law has been referred to this court : "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled in law to set off unabsorbed loss of Rs. 15,50,187 of the assessment year 1950-51 against the business income of the assessment year 1960-61 ?" We should observe at the outset that the law applicable to a p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was employed or of any client of the solicitor. On April 23, 1957, application was made, under section 16 of the Solicitors Act, 1941, by virtue of an amendment thereto effected by section 11 of the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1956, to the disciplinary committee appointed from the members of the Council of the Law Society for an order directing that no solicitor should employ the appellant without the written permission of the Law Society. By order dated September 20,1957, the disciplinary committee made such a direction as from that date. Before the amendment made by the Act of 1956, which was not expressed to be retroactive, there had been no jurisdiction under section 16 of the Act of 1941 to make such an order where the property stolen was not that of the solicitor-employer or his clients' ; the amendment extended the jurisdiction to such circumstances. The appellant appealed against the order on the ground that the amendment effected by the Act of 1956 was not retroactive and that the committee had no jurisdiction. It was held that the disciplinary committee had jurisdiction under the amended section 16 of the Solicitors Act, 1941, to make an order disqualifying the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
