16,000 for the first three years and at the rate of Rs.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner gave numberice to the assessee and disallowed the same.
On 6th April, 1954, the dispute was companypromised and the lease was terminated.
So far as the sugar factory is companycerned, the arrangement was that at five yearly rest an auction was to be held companyfined to the partners and the highest bidder would be given lease to operate the factory for that period under the receiver.
The Appellate Tribunal reversed the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in regard to the admissibility of the claim.
On 16th July, 1948, Sheo Prasad trans ferred his 1/6th share to Banarsi Dass at a stated valuation of Rs.4,50,000.
The properties were put in charge of a receiver appointed by the Court.
10,000 for the subsequent two years.
In 1951, Kanshi Ram sued for cancellation of the lease.
In the year ,1944, Sheo Prasad, one of the brothers who was a partner of the firm instituted a suit in the Lahore High Court for dissolution of the firm.
The Joint Family which owned inter alia a sugar factory at Bijnore.
During the assessment proceedings, the nature of these receipts came to be debat ed the assessee maintained that these were in the nature of capital receipt lieu of the lease hold interest and the Income tax Officer maintained that those were revenue re ceipts.
In the assessment year in dispute the assessee claimed that the unabsorbed loss of the preceding year should be brought for ward and set off against its share in lease money received from the Receiver in respect of B. Sugar Mills.
After setting off the loss against other heads of income there remained an unabsorbed loss of Rs.78,084.
Dealing with this question, the High Court ob served.
16,000 and Rs.39,262 received from Kanshi Ram and Devi Chand respectively were assessable as income of the assessee?
The sugar mill was being assessed as an Association of Persons.
Raja Ram Agarwal and Mrs. Rani Chhabra for the Appellants.
Devi Chands 1/6th share was also returned on mutual arrangement and he agreed to pay a sum of Rs.39,000 and odd annually to Banarsi Dass for the lease period.
In due companyrse, the Tribunal ultimately upheld the view of the Revenue.
Kanshi Ram undertook to pay to Banarsi Dass at the rate of Rs.
On 3rd May, 1950, another brother, Devi Chand, leased out his 1/6th share to Banarsi Dass on an annual payment of Rs.50,000.
Thus the assessee as also the Revenue applied to the Tribunal to refer the case to the High Court.
the unabsorbed carried forward loss of Rs.78,084 was liable to be set off against the share of the rent received by the assessee from the Receiver.
This claim of the assessee has been disallowed and the question arises as to whether the assessee was entitled to carry forward and set off the loss as claimed by it.
On 13th July, 1950, yet another brother, Kanshi Ram, similarly leased out his 1/6th share to Banarsi Dass for a similar sum.
From the Judgment and Order dated 3.9.
From the Judgment and Order dated 5.5.
During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1953 54, the assessee had suffered a loss in sugar business.
As far as relevant, the following questions were referred for the opinion of the High Court under section 66 1 of the Act at the instance of the assessee.
1972 of the Allahabad High Court in I.T. Reference No.
850 of 1973 etc.
Banarsi Dass.
Partition of the companyntry followed and after the parties shifted over to India a fresh suit was instituted at Bijnore for purposes of partition.
1970 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Miscellaneous ITR No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
461 of 1961.
With CIVIL APPEAL No.
One more question that arose was the admissibility of a claim of expenditure being payment of interest on a loan taken for purchase of shares in the sugar factory.
941 of 1975.
as found by the High Court.
B. Ahuja and Ms. A Subhashini for the Respondents.
The Income tax Officer had allowed the claim of Rs.75,211.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MISRA, J. CA.
Assessee and five of his brothers companystituted a Hindu Joint Family.
850 of 1973 This appeal is by certificate and is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad.
The relevant assessment year is 1953 54 companyresponding to the accounting period ending on 30th June, 1952.
236 of 1969.
In 1930 there was partition in the family and the members of the erstwhile Joint Family companystituted themselves into a partnership firm which took over the sugar factory and operated the same.
