Business carried on in British India where orders were accepted and contracts concluded at the local branch.

The assessee was treated as carrying on business in British India because the Muzaffarpur establishment was a branch and not merely a canvassing agency. Orders were accepted there, contracts for sale and delivery were concluded there, and goods were stored there, showing that core business operations were conducted in British India. The fact that orders were forwarded to Rajputana for execution and payments were made to the head office did not displace that finding. On those facts, the assessee was held rightly taxable under the Indian Income-tax Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was resident in British India and carried on business there, and whether the assessee was rightly taxed under the Indian Income-tax Act.

Analysis: The evidence supported the finding that the assessee had a real branch at Muzaffarpur and not merely a canvassing agent. The branch was housed in rented premises, orders were accepted there, contracts for sale and delivery were concluded there, salt was stored there, and the activities of the Muzaffarpur establishment showed business operations in British India. The fact that orders were sent to Rajputana for execution and payments were made to the head office did not displace the conclusion that business was carried on at Muzaffarpur. The foreign merchant authorities relied on by the assessee were distinguishable because, in this case, acceptance took place in British India.

Conclusion: The assessee was carrying on business in British India and was rightly taxed under the Indian Income-tax Act.

---