291 with respect to the personal rights privileges and dignities of a ruler of an indian state.
he is a government servant.
adverting to those allegations this is what was stated in the affidavit filed by shri s.k.
7 of the petition that in all the autonumberous districts under table part a of paragraph 26 of the sixth schedule of the companystitution of india there are a large number of persons belonging to scheduled tribe who derive companysiderable income from trade companymerce and business and other sources and employments and immovable properties.
the income tax authorities as well as the union of india have companye up to this companyrt in appeal by special leave.
1922 as well as s. 10 26 of the income tax act 1961 to the extent they excluded government servants from the benefit of the exemption given thereunder are void.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated february 13 1965 of the assam and nagaland high companyrt in civil rule number 127 of 1963.
14 of the constitution.
dutta income tax officer the first appellant in the appeal with reference to the statements made in paragraph 7 of the petition i say that the petitioner being a government servant his case stands on a different footing other than the general public of the scheduled tribe.
they were under native states.
the respondent in his petition before the high companyrt averred in para.
all these are admitted facts.
the facts of this case lie within a narrow companypass.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 809 of 1966.
he challenged the legality of his assessments in civil rule number 127 of 1963 on the file of the high companyrt of judicature of assam.
mukherjee for the respondent.
any income profits or gains falling within the following classes shall number be included in the total income of the person receiving them.
m. sen advocate general for the state of nagaland r. barthakur and r. gopalakrishnan for the intervener.
the assam high companyrt accepted his petition and quashed the assessments in question holding that s. 4 3 xxi of the indian income tax act.
netyar for r.n.
sachthey for the appellants.
c. setalvad and d.n.
the finance act of 1955 incorporated into the indian income tax act1922 s.4 3 xxi .
it may be remembered till 15 8 47 khasi and jaintia hills were number parts of british india.
the relevant portion of s. 4 3 reads thus 4 3 .
for our present purpose it may be taken that the said two provisions are similar.
the respondent who is a government servant serving in the state of assam has been assessed to income tax for the assessment years 1959 60 1960 61 1961 62 and 1962 63.
the respondent belongs to mikir scheduled tribe and is a permanent inhabitant of united khasi jaintia hills district an autonumberous district included in part a of the table appended to paragraph 20 of the sixth schedule of the companystitution of india.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by hegde j. the only question that arises for decision in this appeal is whether the exclusion of the government servants from the exemption given under s. 4 3 xxi of the indian income tax act 1922 and later on under s. 10 26 of the income tax act 1961 is violative of art.
in the return filed by the appellants those allegations were number denied.
