SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1972 Supreme(SC) 385

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.S. HEGDE, P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY AND H.R. KHANNA, JJ.
The Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. Lucknow, Appellant
Versus
M/s. Gangadhar Baijnath General Gang Kanpur, Respondent and
Civil Appeals Nos. 1746 and 2022 of 1968, D/- 23-8-1972.
(1) Civil Appeal No. 1746 of 1968,
(2) Civil Appeal No. 2022 of 1968,
M/s. Gangadhar Baijnath, Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., Respondent.

Headnote:

Income-tax Act, 1922 – Section 66(1),10 and 12-B - Termination of contract - Compensation - Material facts of case as could be gathered from statement of case are these assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business of financing, money lending, selling agencies and like pursuits - Relevant assessment year concerned accounting year ending - Three partners of assessee firm entered into an agreement with some - Partners of the assessee firm and the remaining three partners were to invest amount required to acquire shares in question equally and all benefits including managing agency, selling agency, quota rights should be enjoyed in joint account but selling agency which was in hands of assessee firm should continue to be in its hands till Dussehra of that year - Similarly quota rights which were in hands of Group should continue in hands of that Group till Dussehra of that year - Whether remaining portion was a Revenue receipt or Capital receipt – Held, now court come to transfer of selling agency to Co - This is not a right transferred under agreement - That right had been transferred to Company even at time partnership was formed - Assessee was no more owner of that selling agency - On that day it was an asset of company - Hence compensation paid can only relate to termination of contract of partnership and not to transfer of the selling agency - For the reasons mentioned court hold that the entire sum received by the assessee was a revenue receipt assessable under Section 10 - In the result Civil Appeal is dismissed - On court indicating court tentative conclusion on firm question referred to High Court, learned Solicitor-General appearing for revenue did not press Civil Appeal - It is accordingly dismissed- Order accordingly.

Judgment

HEGDE, J. :- These are appeals by certificate from the decision of the High Court of Allahabad in a Reference under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Allahabad Bench) referred to the High Court for its opinion the following questions :

"(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the receipt of Rs. 35,01,000/- constituted income liable to tax under Section 10 of the Income-tax Act ?

(2) Whether it was competent to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to invoke the provisions of Section 12-B for the assessment of Rs. 35,01,000/- when the Income-tax Officer had assessed the amount under Section 10 of the Income-tax Act ?

(3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the receipt of Rs. 35,01,000/- was taxable under Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act ?"

3. The High Court answered the first and the second question in favour of the Revenue and on the third question it recorded its opinion that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the receipt in question was not taxable under Section 12-B of the Act.

4. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court the Commissioner of Income-tax has brought Civil Appeal No. 1746 of 1968 and the assessee Civil Appeal No. 2022 of 1968.

5. The material facts of the case as could be gathered from the statement of case are these : The assessee is a partnership firm carrying on business of financing, moneylending, selling agencies and the like pursuits. The relevant assessment year is 1948-49, the concerned accounting year ending in October, 1947. On April 29, 1946 the three partners of the assessee firm entered into an agreement with Gajadhar Jaipuria, R. S. Puran Mal Jaipuria and Mangloo Ram Jaipuria. The terms of the agreement as found by the Tribunal, were :

(1) That the partners should acquire on joint account, the shares of the Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. and Eland Ltd.

(2) The partners of the assessee firm (who will hereinafter be referred to as the "Bagla Group") and the remaining three partners (who will hereinafter be referred to as the "Jaipuria Group") were to invest the amount required to acquire the shares in question equally and all benefits including the managing agency, selling agency, quota rights should be enjoyed in joint account but the selling agency which was in the hands of the assessee firm should continue to be in its hands till the Dussehra of that year. Similarly the quota rights which were in the hands of the Jaipuria Group should continue in the hands of that Group till the Dussehra of that year.

(3) Neither party should acquire any share in his separate account or have any interest directly or indirectly to the exclusion of the other.

6. Till the date of the formation of this partnership, the assessee firm consisting of "Bagla Group" were the selling agents of the Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. The "Jaipuria Group" whichh was a different firm were enjoying some rights in that mill. In pursuance of the agreement above referred to, the new partnership "Bagla Jaipuria and Co." purchased shares of the Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. For that purpose both the groups contributed equally. But no partnership deed as such was entered into by the partners. On July 16, 1946, an agreement was entered into between the Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd., and the Bagla Jaipuria and Co. appointing the latter as the managing agents of the Company for a period of twenty years. On October 7, 1946, another agreement was entered into by the partners of the Bagla Jaipuria and Co. whereby it was decided that one of the two Groups would retire from the business with effect from October 6, 1946 subject to the terms and conditions specified in that agreement. The relevant clauses of that agreement read thus :

"It is agreed that one or other of the Bagla or Jaipuria groups shall retire from the said partnership with effect from 6th October, 1946. The continuing group shall










































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top