Professional tax liability depends on a practical reading of "days", not a purely mechanical count of hours outside municipal limits.

Liability to professional tax under the District Municipalities Act turned on a reasonable construction of "days" as periods of twenty-four hours, not a mechanical count of fractions of a day. The relevant inquiry was whether the office-holder was within municipal limits for sixty complete and unbroken periods, assessed pragmatically by the cause, character, and duration of any absence. Brief or personal absences would not necessarily break the count, but presence overnight alone was not enough where the day was substantially spent outside the limits. On the facts, the municipality failed to establish liability, and the petition was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether liability to professional tax under Section 55 of the District Municipalities Act depended on the office-holder having held office within municipal limits for sixty complete and unbroken periods of twenty-four hours, and how fractions of a day were to be counted.

Analysis: The expression "days" in the provision was construed to mean a duration of twenty-four hours unless the context required otherwise. The Court held that no rigid rule could be applied to every absence from the municipal limits. Whether a particular day counted depended on the cause, character, and duration of the absence. Brief or personal absences would not prevent the day from being counted, but absence from morning till evening in the course of official duties would not justify treating mere overnight presence as sufficient. The question had to be answered on a reasonable view of the whole facts.

Conclusion: The municipality failed to establish liability on the facts found, and the petition was dismissed with costs.

Final Conclusion: For assessing professional tax under the provision, the period of holding office had to be determined pragmatically by reference to the entire circumstances of presence and absence within municipal limits, not by a mechanical counting of fractions of days.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal liability turns on the number of days an office-holder was within local limits, days must be counted according to a reasonable construction of the statutory language, taking account of the cause and duration of absence rather than applying a purely arithmetical test.

---