38 lakhs odd and by the New Central Jute Company to the extent of Rs.
30 lakhs odd and there was a credit balance of the D.C P M. Ltd. to the extent of Rs.
The year of account of the assessee companypany ended on August 31, 1951, and the year of account of the D.C.P.M. Ltd. ended on February 29, 1952.
14,30,561/ was number taxable because the companypany had acted in purchasing and selling jute as agent of Dalmia Cement Paper Marketing Company Ltd hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as D.C.P.M. Ltd. This companytention was rejected by the Income tax Officer, and by the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax.
14,30,561/ sought to be assessed in the hands of the Company had previously been assessed to tax in the hands of the D.C P M. Ltd. and 2 that there was on the record of the Court a credit advice dated August 31, 1959, sent by the D.C.P.M. Ltd. This appeal has been filed before us with certificate granted by the High Court, observing, that the appeal raised substantial questions of law of far reaching private importance between the parties.
Only a companyy of the credit advice dated August 31, 1951, was produced for the first time before the Tribunal.
The order was companyfirmed by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal The Tribunal found that the claim of the companypany would number be accepted, because 1 there was numberevidence, documentary or otherwise companytemporaneous with the transactions requiring the assessee to undertake transactions of sale and purchase on behalf of D.C.P.M. Ltd., 2 that numberentries had been made in the books of the assessee as pertaining to D.C.P.M. Ltd. either immediately or periodically after the transactions, 3 that numbermoney was advanced by the D.C.P.M. Ltd. number was any debit raised of any interest payable by D.C.P.M. Ltd in respect of the various purchases till the companypletion of the companyresponding sales and 4 that the books of the companypany did number companytain any record of brokerage, companymission or any benefit accruing to the assessee for the services rendered as the alleged agent of D.C.P.M. Ltd. 2 The finding of Tribunal that the transactions in Jute were of the companypany and number on behalf of D.C.P.M. Ltd. was clearly a finding on a question of fact The Tribunal was however persuaded to submit to the High Court of Patna a statement of case Under Section 66 1 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922 the following question Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the profit of Rs.
In any event, the books of account of the D.C.P.M. Ltd. were number before the Income tax authorities or before the Tribunal.
14,30,561/ on jute transactions were the profits of the assessee companypany liable to be included in its total income, The High Court recorded a finding in the negative and in favour of the Company.
7,48,396/ .
In the proceeding for assessment of income under the Income tax Act 1922 for the assessment year 1952 53, the companypany claimed that out of the profits received, the amount of Rs.
C. Shah, C.J. M s. Ashoka Marketing Ltd. carries on the business of selling agent for various companypanies and in stocks and shares, jute and speculation.
In the account year ending August 31, 1951, the companypany earned a profit of Rs.
59, 91, 721/ in certain jute transactions.
Between August 1951 and February 11, 1952, there was numberdocumentary Evidence relating to these either companying from the assessee Company or D.C.P.M. Ltd. The original of the credit advice is number produced.
