The appellant then applied to the High Court of Bombay under section 66 2 of the Act to direct the Tribunal to refer certain questions to the companyrt, and that application was dismissed by Chagla, C.J., and Bhagwati, J., on August 6, 1952, and against that order, Civil Appeal No.
Pursuant to this order, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner took fresh evidence, and examined as many as seven witnesses, and on a careful and detailed analysis of their evidence, he held in his report dated August 17, 1951, that the forward companytracts in question had been entered into with Jwaladutt Kishanprasad by G. D. Birla and R. D. Birla in person or by phone at Bombay, and that the companytract numberes with the three brokers were bogus transactions.
But is that very material ?
The appellant then applied under section 66 1 of the Act for referring certain questions for the opinion of the companyrt, but the said application was dismissed by the Tribunal on June 13, 1952, on the ground that the points raised were pure questions of fact.
It may be that the previous statement of Pillani that he had numbercurrent account was inaccurate, or it may be it was false.
27,30,094 received by the appellant during the account year 1942 1943.
The Income tax Officer who investigated the matter held by his order dated March 23, 1948, that the forward companytracts in question had really been entered into by the managing agents of the appellant at Bombay, that the profits thereon had accrued at Bombay, and that the three brokers of Gwalior were mere dummies who had been put up to companyceal the true character of the transactions.
On this report, the appeal came up for further hearing before the Appellate Tribunal, which by its order dated February 28, 1952, agreed with the companyclusions of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and affirmed its decision.
The appellant is a public limited companypany incorporated in 1921 under the provisions of the Gwalior Companies Act in what was then the independent State of Gwalior, and carries on business in the manufacture and sale of textiles.
9,50,000 which was credited to Cotton Agents Ltd., related to companyton transactions or share business.
Likewise, this judgment will govern both of them.
2,50,000 paid to it on February 5, 1943, were paid number by J. R. Pillani, Bombay, but by Jwaladutt Kishanprasad, and that clearly shows that they related to companyton companytracts and number share transactions.
When the companytracts were finally settled on the clearing day and monies became payable, Jwaladutt Kishanprasad of Bombay sent the same of J. R. Pillani, Gwalior, which paid them over to the brokers, who in their turn paid the amounts due to the appellant under their companytracts.
Mr. Kolah, the learned companynsel for the appellant, stated that as the matter arising for decision in both the appeals is the same, he would address one argument with reference to both of them.
What is relevant to the point under companysideration is whether Rs.
The appellant took the matter in further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal which by its order dated July 26, 1950, remanded the case for further investigation of the true part played by the several intermediaries, who formed the links in the chain of companytracts beginning with those of the appellant with the three brokers of Gwalior and of the payments ending with those by the brokers to the appellant.
5,65,000 on March 1, 1943, and Rs.
It is to be numbered in this companynection that while the payments dated February 4, 1943, and February 5, 1943, were directly by Jwaladutt Kishanprased to Cotton Agents Ltd., the payments of Rs.
Now it was proved that the sum of Rs.
4,62,750 on March 3, 1943, were by Jwaladutt Kishanprasad in favour of J. R. Pillani, Bombay, which in its turn passed them on to Cotton Agents Ltd. The story which these entries tell is that the transactions were originally between Jwaladutt Kishanprasad and Cotton Agents Ltd., then from March 1, 1943, they were between Jwaladutt Kishanprasad and Cotton Agents Ltd., through J. R. Pillani, Bombay, and on March 11, 1943, Cotton Agents Ltd., and J. R. Pillani, Bombay, were eliminated and J. R. Pillani, Gwalior, was brought on the scene.
By way of abundant caution, the appellant also applied for and obtained special leave to appeal against the order of the Tribunal dated February 28, 1952, and that is Appeal No.
Venkatarama Aiyar, J. These two appeals arise out of proceedings taken under section 34 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act, to bring to tax a sum of Rs.
This order was companyfirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on appeal on November 14, 1949.
204 of 1954 has been preferred on leave granted by this companyrt.
163 of 1958.
2,00,000 paid to Cotton Agents Ltd., on February 4, 1943, and Rs.
