Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Apparels Export Promotion ...
1991 Latest Caselaw 120 Del

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner seeks reference of the following question to this court in this petition for the assessment year 1979-80 :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of Rs. 20 lakhs, received from the Cotton Textiles Export Promotion Council forms part of the corpus of the trust and hence is not taxable ?"

2. The respondent had received Rs. 20 lakhs from the Cotton Textile Export Promotion Council. This amount was not taxed by the Income-tax Officer. The Commissioner of Income-tax passed an order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, and set aside the order of the Income-tax Officer and directed the Income-tax Officer to investigate the matter. The assessed filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The assessed contended before the Tribunal that the amount of Rs. 20 lakhs which was received formed part of the corpus. Reliance was placed on the treatment given to this amount in the assessed's own balance-sheet and also to a certificate of November, 1983, of the Chairman of the donor, namely, Cotton Textiles Export Promotion Council. The Tribunal relied upon the documents and gave a finding of fact to the effect that the amount of Rs. 20 lakhs was a capital receipt.

3. The question proposed accepts the facts and circumstances found by the Tribunal and the facts found are that the assessed had received Rs. 20 lakhs with a specific direction that the same should be treated as corpus of the assessed-company. It is not sought to be agitated by the Department that the order passed is perverse. No question is sought to be referred to the effect that the Tribunal has ignored the relevant material or has arrived at a finding which could not have been arrived at. It is submitted by Mr. Gupta that we can reframe the question. This court can certainly reframe a question but it cannot so reframe a question as to make it a new case.

4. The question which is sought to be referred in the present case is a pure question of fact and hence no reference is called for.

5. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.