When these numberices were issued both the officers did number know that the business of Burn Co., had been bought by the partners of Martin Co. Subsequently this transaction was brought to the knowledge of the income tax authorities whereupon Burn Co.s file was transferred by the officer dealing with District 11, and in February 1928, an assessment order was made on Martin Co., in respect of the companybined incomes returned by Martin Co., and Burn Co., on the footing that the business of Burn Co., had become a branch of Martin Co. Martin Co., appealed against this assessment and their appeal was allowed by the High Court in May 1930.
The assessee then moved the Income tax Appellate Tribunal but on August 21, 1 1948 16 I.T.R. 325.
93,604 from it.
In the result, he included the said amount in the total income for the purposes of assessment, but ordered that the realisation of the tax on the aid amount should be stayed till the decision of the Privy Council or March 31, 1947, whichever was earlier.
Meanwhile the assessee died and the appellant succeeded to the estate of his deceased father.
This numberice called upon the assessee to file a fresh return as the Income tax Officer had reason to believe that a part of the assessees income assessable to income tax for the year ending March 31, 1946, had escaped assessment.
The appellant then applied for and obtained a certificate from the Patna High Court on September 13, 1954.
By this order the 1 1946 14 I.T.R. 673.
The proceedings thus taken by the officer under s. 34 ultimately led to a revised assessment order passed under s. 23 3 and s. 34 of the Act and the amount of Rs.
The Income Tax Officer was accordingly directed to determine the latter amount and to levy tax on it.
93,604 and directed the Income tax Officer to make fresh assessment.
The tribunal rejected this application on February 27, 1951.
He also observed that it was number clear as to what portion of the said amount was interest on arrears of agricultural rents and what portion related to interest on arrears of number agricultural rents.
This order was passed under s. 23 3 of the Act on December 31, 1945.
of the Patna High Court and the question was answered by them in favour of the department.
Pursuant to this appellate order the Income tax Officer made a fresh assessment under ss.
a and b of s. 34 1 and that the Income tax Officer bad reason to believe that a part of the assessees income had escaped assessment.
Thereupon the appellant moved the Patna High Court under s. 66 2 of the Act his application was allowed and the tribunal was directed by the High Court on December 15, 1951, to state the case and refer the question of law for its opinion.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated April 7, 1954, of the Patna High Court in Misc.
On April 7, 1954, this reference was heard by V. Ramaswamy and C. P. Sinha JJ.
327 of 1951.
1950, the tribunal companyfirmed the order passed by the appellate authority and dismissed the assessees appeal.
total amount of income liable to tax was determined after deducting the whole of the amount of Rs.
As a result of this decision, the Income tax Officer issued a numberice to the assessee under s. 34 of the Act on September 25, 1948.
Some other minor reductions were also allowed in companypliance with the appellate order.
taken by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Patna, against Maharaja Bahadur Rama Rajaya Prasad Singh, the father of the appellant, to levy income tax for the year 1945 46.
The department did number challenge either the appellate order or the subsequent order passed by the Income tax Officer in pursuance of the said appellate order.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
N. Rajagopala Sastri, R. H. Dhebar and D. Gupta, for the respondent.
The total income assessed to income tax by the said order was Rs.
V. Viswanatha Sastri and B. K. Sinha, for the appellant.
It was held that the provisions of a. 34 as amended in 1948 applied to the case and that the decision of the Privy Council brought it within the purview of sub s. 1 b of s. 34.
Judicial Case No.
Proceedings.
He held that the subsequent decision of the Privy Council in the case of Kamakshya Narain Singh supra 1 was information within the meaning of cls.
It was urged before the Income tax Officer by the assessee that this amount was number liable to be taxed in view of the decision of the Patna High Court in Kamakshya Narain Singh Commissioner of Income Tax 1 .
The question thus raised is Whether in the circumstances of the case the assessment order under s. 34 of the Act of the interest on arrears of rent is legal ?
This amount included the sum of Rs.
On May 8, 1946, the appellate authority held that the Income tax Officer was bound to follow the decision in the case of Kamakshya Narain Singh supra 1 and so, he set aside the order under appeal in regard to the amount of Rs.
In companypliance with the requisition of the High Court the tribunal by its order passed on July 23, 1952, submitted a statement of the case and referred to the High Court for its opinion the question of law raised by the appellant.
This revised assessment order was passed on April 30, 1949.
Subsequently, on July 6, 1948, the appeal preferred by the department to the Privy Council against the decision of the Patna High Court in Kamakshya Narain Singhs case 1 was allowed and it was held that interest on arrears of rent payable in respect of agricultural land is number agricultural income for it is neither rent number revenue derived from land.
The Income tax Officer, however, held that, since the department had obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the said decision, the matter was sub judice and so be would number be justified in accepting the assessees companytention.
Against this order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Patna.
23 3 and 31 of the Act on August 20, 1946.
297 of 1955.
1,60,602.
October 1.
93,604 received by the assessee on account of interest on arrears of rent due to him after deduction of companylection charges.
The assessee appealed against this order but the appellate authority dismissed the assessees appeal and companyfirmed the said order on July 26, 1949.
He then filed an application under s. 66 1 of the Act requiring the tribunal to refer the question of law raised in the case to the Patna High Court for its opinion.
93,604 was added to the assessment amount as interest on arrears of rent.
A similar numberice was issued by the Income tax Officer of District 11.
