1985 (10) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to us for our opinion is : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cost of materials supplied by the Government was liable to be included in the total receipt of the assessee for calculating its profit for the assessment year 1967-68 ?" The point referred to us itself indicates that we are concerned with the assessment year 1967-68. The assessee is a contractor eng....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of the assessee. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the stand of the assessee. According to him, the gross amount paid to the assessee had to be taken into account for ascertaining the net profit of the assessee. The appellate authority, however, took a different view of the matter. He held that the facts showed that the materials supplied to the assessee were not within his control, but were....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ideration of this court of this very assessee for the assessment year 1968-69. That was disposed of by Bench of this court on November 21, 1984, in Taxation Case No. 57 of 1975, CIT v. S R Viz Construction Co. [1987] 163 ITR 666 (Pat). In that case also, the finding of the Tribunal was, as in the present case, that the assessee not having control over the materials supplied to him, the net receipt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s misplaced. In the case of Kalpnath Rai [1985] 151 ITR 281, the case of Ramesh Chandra Chaturvedi was distinguished. The case of the present assessee in this reference as also in Case No. 57 of 1975 (CIT v. S. P Viz Construction Co. [1987] 163 ITR 666 (Pat)), are in accord with the case of Kalpnath Rai and they materially differed from the case of Ramesh Chandra Chaturvedi [1980] 121 ITR 116. In ....