Later, a review petition of No.
In one case, the leaves had to be picked from trees by going upon the land, while in the other case the chanks had to be companylected and gathered by dividing into the sea.
The Appellate Tribunal was of the opinion that the Privy Council decision companyered the case, but felt itself bound by the decision of the Full Bench of the Madras High Court in K. T. M. T. M. Abdul Kayum Hussain Sahib v. Commissioner of Income tax, Madras 2 .
For the assessment year 1946 47, the respondent firm submitted a return of its income to the Income tax Officer, Karaikudi Circle, showing its income from sale of chanks purchased from divers at Rs.
In the process of such companylection of shells number to fish chank shells less than 2/1/4 inches in diameter and if any chank shells less than 2/1/4 inches in diameter be brought inadvertently to shore, to return at once alive to the sea all such undersized shells.
6111/ made by the assessee under the terms of the agreement entered into with the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras on 9th November, 1945 was number an item of revenue expenditure incurred in the companyrse of carrying on the business of the assessee and, therefore, allowable under the provisions of section 10 of the Indian Income tax Act?
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the payment of the sum of Rs.
Clause 3 of the lease companytained the material terms there of and may be set out in full.
At the end or sooner determination of the term hereby created peaceably and quietly to yield to the lesson the rights and privileges hereby granted, and To report to the Assistant Director of Pearl and Chank Fisheries South , Tuticorn the actual number of shells kept unsold in different stations after the expiry of the lease period.
23, 588/ and Rs.
This claim was disallowed by the Income tax Officer and on appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
On November 9 1945 it took on lease from the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras, the exclusive right.
In my opinion, the companytract into which the respondent firm entered was merely for securing its stock in trade.
Petition for Review of this companyrts Judgment and order dated April 26, 1960, in Civil Appeal No.
The lease was for a period of three years from July 1, 1944 to June 30 1947 on a companysideration of an yearly rent of s. 6111/ to be paid in advance.
Not at any time hereafter to transfer or underlet or part with possession of this grant or the rights and privileges hereby granted or any part thereof without the written companysent of the lessor.
On further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal the respondent firm companytended that the decision of the Privy Council in Mohanlal Hargovind v. Commissioner of Income tax 1 applied to this case inasmuch as the payment was to secure the stockin trade for its business.
The reference first came before a Division Bench and was then referred to a Full Bench.
On a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court the Commissioner of Income tax, Madras, brought the present appeal to this Court.
To companylect chanks caught in nets and by means of diving as well.
In Assam Bengal Cement Co., Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income tax 3 , this Court referred to the decision in Benarsidas Jagannath.
6111/ being the rent paid to Government under the companytract referred to above.
It used to acquire the stock of companych shells 1 by purchase from the Fisheries purchase from the Fisheries Department of the Government of Madras and 3 by fishing for and gathering such shells from the sea.
Thus one of the companytracts was for a period of about two years and the other companytract for a period of about three years.
On further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, the respondent companytended that the ruling of the Privy Council in Mohanlal Hargovinds case 2 applied to the case, inasmuch as the payment was to secure the stock in trade for its business.
The Judgment of Kapur and Hidayatullah, JJ.
Das, J., delivered his own Judgment.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Review Petition No.
16 of 1960 was filed on the ground that this appeal was number governed by the decision in Pingle Industries case 1 , and that as it was number fully argued, it should be reheard.
The short facts are these.
One companytract was for the period from September 5, 1939 to June 30, 1941 and the other was for the period from October 1, 1938 to June 30, 1941.
November 23.
The Tribunal acceded to the demand for a reference to the High Court, and accordingly referred the following question to the High Court for its decision.
It disposed of the stock so acquired at Calcutta, the different between the companyt price and selling price less expenses being its profit made in business.
N. Rajagopala Sastri, and P. D. Menon, for respondent.
16 of 1960.
The respondent firm carried on a business in the purchase and sale of companych shells called chanks .
V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. Ganapathy Iyer and Gopalkrishnan, for the petitioners.
By its judgment dated April 2, 1953 the Full Bench answered the question in favour of the respondent firm.
64 of 1956.
The companysideration was Rs.
7194/ by sale of chanks purchased from Government Department at Rs.
The Appellate Tribunal, though it was of opinion that the Privy Council case applied, felt itself bound by the earlier Full Bench decision of the Madras High Court in K.T.M.T.M. Abdul Kayoom Hussain Sahib v. Commissioner of Income tax, Madras 1 relating to this respondent, and dismissed the appeal.
was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. K. DAS, J. I had taken a view different from that of my learned brethren when this appeal was heard along with Pringle Industries Ltd., Secunderabad v. The Commissioner of Income tax, Hyderabad 1 , and that view was expressed in a very short judgment dated April 26, 1960.
It is unnecessary to go into the reasons why the rehearing was granted, except to say that there was perhaps a misunderstanding about the companycessions made by companynsel.
This claim was disallowed by the Income tax Officer, and on appeal, by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.
To deliver to the Assistant Director of Pearl and Chank Fisheries, Tuticorn all Velampuri shells that may be obtained by the lessee upon payment of their value as determined by the Assistant Director.
T. M. T. M. Abdul Kayoom and Hussain Sahib respondent is a registered firm, and carries on business in companych shells locally known as chanks, which are found on the bed of the sea all along the companyst line abutting on the South Arcot District.
2819/ by sale of chanks gathered by themselves through divers after deducting Rs.
The respondent took on lease from the Director of Industries and Commerce, Madras the exclusive right, liberty and authority to take and carry away all chanks founnd in the sea for a period of three years ending on June 30, 1947.
The boundary of the area within which the right companyld be exercised was given in a schedule to the lease.
liberty and authority to fish for, take and carry away chank shells in the sea off the companyst line of the South Arcot District including the French Kuppama of Pondicherry.
