TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1967 (7) TMI 4
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, the Tribunal was right in holding that a proportionate part of the profits determined on sales grouped under items 3, 4, 5 and 9 in the assessment order by the application of rule 33 was assessable to income-tax ? " The High Court, in view of its answer to this question, did not answer the following question (Question No. 2) : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the applicant's case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in respect of sales of Rs. 14,80,059 the profit was correctly determined by the application of rule 33 and one-third of the profits so determined could be said to accrue or arise in British India ? " We are not concerned with the remaining question (Question No. 1) which related to sales to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (b) Sales to British Indian merchants through brokersand agents in British India 2,91,891 . . . 2,91,891 . . . 2,91,891 (4) (c) Sales to British Indian merchants and brokers during their visit at Indore 3,85,214 . . . 3,85,214 . . . 2,86,224 (5) (d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Assistant Commissioner from the said sales of Rs. 6,66,787. Sales of Rs. 3,35,855 under this category received in British India by the representative of the assessee at Bombay were taxed on receipt basis and the same was not contested, as stated above. The goods under the contracts referred to hereinabove were delivered f.o.r. Indore. The relevant railway receipt made in the name of 'self ' was endorsed in favour of the customer and was handed over to the Imperial Bank of India, Indore, for being delivered to the merchant. Sale proceeds were received at Indore through the Imperial Bank of India, Indore. (b) Sales of Rs. 2,91,891.--The brokers in British India who were described as freelance brokers transmitted the offers to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... bore the Holkar State stamps, aggregated to Rs. 57,390 which was deleted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner from the aforesaid sales of Rs. 3,13,306. The goods were delivered f.o.r. Indore. The railway receipt was made in the name of ' self ' and was endorsed in favour of the customer and handed over to the Imperial Bank of India for being delivered to the merchants. The sale proceeds were recovered from the Imperial Bank of India, Indore, at Indore as in other cases. " The Income-tax Officer held that profits apportionable on sales of Rs. 16,57,198 accrued or arose in British India and as such taxed the same on accrual basis. Rs. 3,35,855 having been received in British India were taxed on accrual-cum-receipt basis. The Appellate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es. He says that the method of delivery in the four categories was similar, namely, that the railway receipts were made in the name of " self " and endorsed in favour of the customers and were handed over to the Imperial Bank of India, Indore, for being delivered to the merchant and sale proceeds were received at Indore through the Imperial Bank of India, Indore. He further says that the fact that the goods were to be delivered f.o.r. at Indore does not make the property in the goods pass at Indore. There is considerable force in the learned counsel's submissions. In Seth Pushalal Mansinghka (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, this court, on similar facts, held that the property in the goods passed in Part A and Part C States where the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t had to be considered. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that no such point was raised before the Appellate Tribunal and we should not allow the appellant to raise this point at this stage. It seems to us that before the High Court stress was laid on the " formation of the contract and its complete performance " and not on the aspect of the passing of property in the goods. These questions are perhaps relevant to the answering of question No. 2 but we are unable to regard this aspect as a new question. Following our judgment in Seth Pushalal Mansinghka (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, we hold that the income accrued within British India and that a proportionate part of the income was assessable to income-tax. In view....