The judgment of the court was delivered by
KHANNA J.--This judgment would dispose of five Civil
Appeals Nos. 1062 to 1066 which arise out of references under section 66(1) of
the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, made at the instance of the assessee-appellant.
The assessee-appellant, Hukam Chand Mills Ltd., Indore, is
a public limited company. It owns a textile mill at Indore and carries on the
business of manufacture and sales of textiles. These appeals have a long history
and are concerned with the income of the appellant during the calendar years
1941, 1942, 1944, 1945 and 1946, the relevant assessment years for which were
1942-43, 1943-44, 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1947-48. In those years the assessee
effected sales of textiles to merchants in the then British India. Question
which arose for consideration was as to what part of the income arising out of
those sales transactions accrued or arose in British India. As the questions of
law involved in each of the appeals were identical, the facts relating to the
assessment year 1942-43 only were taken into consideration. According to the
finding of the Income-tax Officer in that year the price of the textiles sold by
the assessee in British India aggregated to Rs. 14,80,059. This amount consisted
of the following four categories :
Rs.
(a) Sales in pursuance of business canvassed
by company's representatives in British India, also
described as item (3) 6,46,028
(b) Sales to British Indian merchants through
brokers and agents in British India, also described
as item (4) 2,91,891
(c) Sales to British Indian merchants and brokers
during their visit at Indore, also described as
item (5) 2,86,224
(d) Sales to British Indian merchants at the
time of their own or their broker's visit at Indore,
also described as item (9) 2,55,916
Total : 14,80,059
Profits from those sales were held at 31.12 per cent. to
amount to Rs. 4,60,560. Profit attributable to operations carried out in British
India were held by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to be one-third of Rs.
4,60,560, i.e., Rs. 1,53,520. In doing so, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner
acted upon the analogy of rule 33 of the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922. We need
not set out the finding of the Income-tax Officer. The Tribunal substantially
agreed with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. At the instance of the
assessee, the following two questions were, inter alia, referred to the High
Court :
" (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances
of the applicants' case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in respect of
the sales of Rs. 14,80,059 the profit was correctly determined by the
application of rules 33 and one-third of the profits so determined could be said
to accrue or arise in British India ?
(3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the
applicants' case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a proportionate part of
the profits determined on the 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 answered question No. (3) in favour of the
assessee. In view of its finding on question No. (3), the High Court did not
answer question No. (2). The Commissioner of Income-tax then came up in appeal
to this court and the decision of this court is reported in [1968] 67 ITR 79
(Commissioner of Income-tax v. Hukumchand Mills Ltd.). This court held that the
answer to question No. (3) should be in the negative as the property in the
goods passed to the purchaser in British India and the proportionate part of the
profits of these sales accrued in British India and as such was assessable to
Indian income-tax. The case was remitted to the High Court to answer question
No. (2), in accordance with law. On remand the High Court held that the profits
were correctly determined by the application of rule 33 and one-third of the
profits so determined could be said to arise or accrue in British India. When
the matter came up in appeal before this court, it was found that the High Court
had not taken into account the relevant circumstances for answering question No.
(2). It was also stated by counsel for both the parties that rule 33 was not
applicable to the facts of the case. This court accordingly directed the
Appellate Tribunal to submit a supplementary statement of the case to this
court. Supplementary statement of the case has now been received.
The Tribunal found that in respect of the sales in
categories (a) and (b) amounting to Rs. 9,37,919, it was just and equitable to
apportion 15 per cent. of the profits to have arisen and accrued in British
India. Regarding sales in categories (c) and (d) for a total amount of Rs.
5,42,140 the Tribunal held that 7 1/2 per cent. of the profits could be said to
have accrued and arisen in British India. As the profits were found to represent
31.12 per cent. of the turnover, the profits in respect of the turnover of Rs.
9,37,919 comprised in categories (a) and (b) were calculated at the rate of 4
1/2 per cent. (i.e., 15 per cent. of 31.12 per cent.) The profits in British
India were thus found to be Rs. 42,200. Profits accruing and arising in British
India in respect of sales turnover of Rs. 5,42,140 comprised in categories (c)
and (d) at the rate of 2 1/4 per cent. (7 1/2 per cent. of 31.12 per cent.) were
found to be Rs. 12,200. The total profits accruing or arising in British India
to the assessee-company in the assessment year 1942-43 were thus worked out to
be Rs. 54,400. The above finding of the Tribunal has been arrived at on
consideration of the facts of the case. The modus operandi in respect of the
sales of various categories was found by the Tribunal to be as under :
" (a) Sales of Rs. 6,46,028
(i) The assessee's paid representatives at Bombay
canvassed the sales, on behalf of the assessee, to merchants in British India.
(ii) The orders were sent by British Indian merchants to
the assessee at Indore.
(iii) The assessee accepted the orders at Indore, prepared
the contracts and signed them at Indore and forwarded the same to customers in
British India.
(iv) The customers signed the contracts in British India.
(v) The contracts were signed on the company's forms.
(vi) The contracts bore British Indian stamps.
(b) Sales of Rs. 2,91,891
(i) The brokers in British India, described as freelance
brokers, transmitted the offers to the company at Indore.
(ii) The offers were made to the company on the brokers'
own forms.
(iii) The brokers were not engaged by the assessee-company
and such orders were placed by the brokers in the normal course of their
business.
(iv) The customers signed the contracts in British India.
(c) Sales of Rs. 2,86,224
(i) The sales were made to British Indian merchants who
went to Indore to negotiate and place orders.
(ii) The orders were accepted at Indore.
(iii) The contracts bore British Indian stamps.
(iv) The customers signed the contracts in British India.
(d) Sales of Rs. 2,55,916
(i) These sales were made to British Indian merchants on
their or their brokers' personal visits to Indore.
(ii) The offers were taken direct at Indore.
(iii) Contracts for such sales were made in the same
manner as stated hereinbefore. "
The Tribunal also gave a finding that the assessee
maintained an organisation in British India, that that organisation was
interested in bringing to the notice of the British Indian merchants, brokers
and consuming public the goods manufactured by the assessee-company and that the
ground work for the sales effected in these groups was done in British India.
Nothing has been urged before us either on behalf of the
assessee-appellant or on behalf of the revenue-respondent to assail the finding
of the Tribunal in the supplementary statement of case. The question as to what
proportion of the profits of the sales in categories (a), (b), (c) and (d) arose
or accrued in British India is essentially one of fact depending upon the
circumstances of the case. In the absence of some statutory or other fixed
formula, any finding on the question of proportion involves some element of
guess work. The endeavour can only be to be approximate and there cannot in the
very nature of things be great precision and exactness in the matter. As long as
the proportion fixed by the Tribunal is based upon the relevant material, it
should not be disturbed.
We accordingly accept the appeals, discharge the answer
given to question No. (2) by the High Court and hold that the profit which arose
and accrued in British India to the assessee-appellant for the assessment year
1942-43 was Rs. 54,400. We also hold that it is just and equitable to apportion
15 per cent. of the profits of sales in categories (a) and (b) as accruing or
arising in British India and 7 1/2 per cent. of the profits of sales in
categories (c) and (d) as accruing or arising in British India. The parties in
the circumstances shall bear their own costs.
Appeals allowed