9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (1) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... former employer and joined the services of Tungabhadra Industries with effect from 1-9-1977. The case of the assessee was that he had the option to choose a separate previous year for each source of his income and that the salary from the West Coast Papers Mills Ltd. represented a different source from the salary derived by him from the Tungabhadra Industries. He returned the income from his former employer received for the period from 1-4-1977 to 31-8-1977 as the income earned during the previous year ended 31-3-1978, relevant for the assessment year 1978-79. Regarding the salary earned by him from his new employer from 1-9-1977 to 31-3-1978, the case of the assessee was that he opted the previous year ending 4-8-1978 for this new source o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was no reason as to why the salaries earned from different employers would not form different sources of income. He also observed that section 3(1)(b) gave an option to the assessee to make up his accounts to any date other than the 31st March and as the assessee had opted for closing his accounts on 4-8-1978, the assessee could not be prevented from doing so. In this view of the matter, he held that income earned by the assessee from his new employer could not be assessed during the previous year ended 31-3 1978. 4. Shri S. Krishnan, the learned departmental representative, stated before us that the option under section 3(1)(b) related to persons maintaining books of accounts. He referred to the decision in the case of CIT v. V.V.S. Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of CIT v. Vishnudayal Dwarkadas [1980] 123 ITR 140 (Bom.) and pointed out that the decision in that case went against the assessee only because there was no material to show that the assessee had exercised its option and pointed out that, in the instant case, the assessee had clearly exercised his option at the time of filing the return and so the principal laid down in the case of Vishnudayal Dwarkadas also supported the case of the assessee. 6. We have considered the contentions of both the parties as well as the facts on record. We find force in the contentions raised by the assessee. It has been held in the case of Seth Shiv Prasad that dividends derived from different companies can constitute different sources of income. On t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and, the salary earned from 21-8-1968 to 31-7-1969 was assessable only in the assessment year 1970-71. The Tribunal held that the assessee was quite correct in law to claim what he did. The High Court also confirmed the decision of the Tribunal. In the case before us, the assessee has, admittedly, made up his accounts in respect of salary from his new employer up to 4-8-1978 and so, the income arising from the new source up to 4-8-1978 could not be taxed during the assessment year 1978-79. We also find force in the contention of the learned representative of the assessee that the principle laid down in the case of Vishnudayal Dwarkadas supports the case of the assessee. Hence, we uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 7. In the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
