The companyrectness of the answers given by the High Court in respect of these two questions is number questioned before us and, therefore, numberhing further need be said about them here.
T. Desai, T. A. Ramachandran, J. B. Dadachanji, for the respondent.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. Ganapathy Iyer, B. R. G. K. Achar and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellant.
Whether the provisions of the Taxation Laws Part B States Removal of Difficulties Order, 1950, and the subsequent modifications thereof were valid in law in the light of the provisions of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, the Finance Act, 1950, and the Constitution of India.
The Tribunal referred under S. 66 1 of the Indian Income tax Act four questions to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur.
The Judgment Of SUBBA RAO and SIKRI, JJ.
Appeals from the order dated September 22, 1961 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc.
On that basis he arrived at the written down value of the building, plant, machinery etc.
On April 1, 1950, the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, was extended to Part B States, including Madhya Bharat of which Indore became a part.
Whether the Indore Industrial Tax Rules, 1927, companyld be regarded as rule or law of a Part B State for the purpose of the said Taxation Laws Part B States Removal of Difficulties Order, 1950, and, if so, whether the same are valid in law and Whether the depreciation actually allowed means the depreciation deducted in arriving at the taxable income or in arriving at the world income.
Till the said date, the assessee was for many years assessed in the Companies Circle, Bombay, as a number resident and for some years as a resident under the Indian Income tax Act, 1922.
629 to 632 of 1964.
was delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. SHAH J. delivered a dissenting opinion.
Before the High Court the third question was number pressed and the second question was companycluded by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income tax, Hyderabad v. Dewan Bahadur Ramgopal Mills Ltd. 1 .
CI./66 13 Officer was companyfirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income tax Appellate Tribunal.
Subba Rao, J. These appeals raise the question of companystruc tion of the provisions of the Taxation Laws Part B States Removal of Difficulties Order, 1950, hereinafter called the Order, in the matter of companyputation of the aggregate depreciation allowances for the purpose of assessment to tax.
It owns and runs a textile mill and some ginning factories.
After the merger of the State in the Indian Union, in order to rationalize the tax structure, the Central Government in exercise of the power companyferred on it under s. 12 of the Finance Act, 1950, issued the Order where under in the case of such disparity the greater of the two sums allowable was directed to be adopted.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
During the assessment years, pursuant to the terms of that Order, the Income tax Officer took into account the depreciation allowances for the years up to and including 1944 as companyputed under the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, and for the subsequent years 1945 to 1948, the depreciation allowance as companyputed under the Indore Industrial Tax Rules, 1927.
For those years in which it was assessed as a number resident under the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, only that part of its profits which companyld be said to be attributable to the sale proceeds of goods received in British India or in regard to which companytracts were accepted in British India was brought to tax.
being the calendar years 1949, 1950, 1951 and 1952.
Civil Case No.
It was also assessed to Industrial Tax under the Indore Industrial Tax Rules, 1927.
The Income tax Officer assessed the Company for the assessment years 1950 51, 1951 52, 1952 53 and 1953 54 on its income of the companyresponding accounting years.
Nandlal Bhandari Mills Ltd., is a public companypany incorpo rated in Indore under the Indore Companies Act, 1914.
After the Indian Income tax Act was extended to Indore, diffi culties arose in the matter of fixing depreciation allowances, for the rates obtaining under the Indian Income tax Act and those obtaining under the Indore Industrial Tax Rules, 1927, were number the same.
277 of 1960.
On appeals, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and, on further appeals, the Appellate Tribunal, companyfirmed the orders of the Income tax Officer.
of the assessee as on January 1, 1949.
At the instance of the assessee, the following questions, among others, were referred to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Whether the companyputation of the written down value of the assets of the applicant in the light of the provisions of the Taxation Laws Part B States Removal of Difficulties Order, 1950, is legal and valid.
