Allowed

The Commisslbner of Income-Tax, Punjab v. Shri Thakur Das Bhargava, Advocate, Hissar.

Supreme Court27 Jul 19601960 INSC 113 · [1961] 1 S.C.R. 751960 INSC 113

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An advocate accepted a brief on condition the clients would provide money for charity, and later created a public charitable trust from Rs. 32,500 received. The Supreme Court held no trust or overriding obligation existed when payment was made; the amount was professional income and taxable.

What did the court decide?

High Court judgment set aside; question answered that the sum was professional income taxable in the assessee's hands; appellant entitled to costs throughout.

What the court decided

The Commisslbner of Income-Tax, Punjab versus Shri Thakur Das… — Income Tax | Supreme Court (1961)

¶1

i 's.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 75

¶2

¶3

THE COMMISSlbNER OF INCOME-TAX, PUNJAB

¶4

July •7.

¶5

¶6

SHRI THAKUR DAS BHARGAVA, ADVOCATE, I HISSAR.

¶7

(S. K. DAS, M. HIDAYATULLAH and,J. C. SHAH, JJ.) ' ' t · Income Tax-Professional income-Lawyer accepting case on condition of clients' paying money for charity-Money paid to lawyer and charitable trust created-Whether amount received is professional income. · The assessee, an advocate, accepted a case on condiion that the clients would provide him with Rs. 40,000 for chai;itable purposs and that he would create a public charitable trust with the money. }he clients gave the assessee Rs. 3z,500 and ·he created a trust therewith. The assessee claimed that the said amount of Rs. 3z,500 was not his professional income as the amount had been given to him in trust for charity. Held, that the said amount Was the professional income o'. the assessee and was liable to income-tax. At the time When this money ,was paid to the assessee no trust or obligation inJhe nature of trust was created. The clients who paid the money did not create any trust nor imposed any legally enforceable obligation on the assessee. 'fhe money when it was received by the assessee was his,professional ipcome though he had eXpressed a desire earlier to create~ charitable trust out of the~ money when received. The assessee's own voluntary desire to create a trust out of the fees paid to him, did not create a trust or a legally enforceable obligation. · Raja Bejoy Singh Dudhuria v. Commission<r of Income Tax, Bengal, [1933] l I.T.R. 135, referred.to. CIVIL. APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil . Appeal, No. 236 ofl955. Appeal from the judgment and order dated August 3, 1953, of the Punjab High Court in Civil Reference No. 7/195~. M. C. · Setalvad, Attorney-General for India, K. N. Rajagopal·Sastri and D: Gupta, for the appellant. · N. d. Chatterjee and S. K. Sekhri, for the respond~~ . ' ' . ' 1960. July 27. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

¶8

¶9

76 SCPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1961]

¶10

S. K. DAS J.-fhis 1s an appeal on a certificate of fitness granted under the provisions of aub-s. 2 of Cnmmts-~ioner nf /11c1,:>1e-tax R. 66A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, by the High v. C'ourt of Judicature for the State of Punjab then sit- Thakur Das ting at Simla. The certificate is dated December 28, Bhargaia 1953, and wa.s granted on an application '.Dade by thf Commissioner of Income-I.ax, Punjab, appellant herein. S. K. Das]. The relevant facts a.re shortly stated below.

¶11

For the assesment yea.r I 946-4 7, one Pandit Thakur. da.s Bha.rga.va, a.n advoca.to of HiBBa.·r a.nd respondent btiforc us, was assessed to income tax on a total assessable income of Rs. 58,475/. in the account year 194546. This sum included the amount of Rs. 32,500/sta.ted to have been received by the respondent in July, 1945 for defending the accused persons in a case known as the Farrukhnagar case. The assessee claimed that the said a.mount of Rs. 32,500/· was not a part of his professional income, because the amount was given to him in trust for charity. This claim of the assessee was not accepted by the Income-tax Officer, nor by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who heard the appeal from the order of the Income-tax Officer. Both these officers held that the assessee had received the amount of Rs. 32,500/. as his profession a.I income and the trust which the a.ssessee la.ter created by a .deed of Trust dated August 6, 1945, did not change the nature or character of the receipt as professional income of the aBBessee; they further held that the persons who paid the money t-0 the assessce did not create any trust nor impose any obligation in the nature of a trust binding on the assessec, and in fact and law the trust was created by the assessce himself out of his professional income; therefore, the amount attracted tax as soon as it was received by the aBBessee as his professional income, and its future destination or application was irrelevant for taxing purposes. From the order of the Appellate·Assista.nt Commissioner a further appeal was carried to the Income-tax Appel. late Tribunal, Delhi Branch. We shall presently state the facts which the Tribunal found, but its conclusion drawn from the facts found was expreBBed in the fo II owing words : " The income in this case did not at

¶12

1 S.C.R. SUPREME 'COURT REPORTS

¶13

¶14

any stage arise to. the assessee. Keeping in mind the express stipulation made by the-_assesses when he accepte t e rie · t ere was a d h b f h vo l untary trust created, \·hich h11od to be and was subsequently reduced into writing after the money was subscribed. The' pay. men ts receiyed from the accused and other persons were received on behalf of the trust aI)d not ·by the assessee in his capacity ·as an· individual. In this view; we delete the sum of Rs. 32,500/from the assessment." . The appellant then moved the Tribunal for stating a case tQ the High Court on the question of law which · arose out of the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal was of the opinion that a question of law did arise out of its order, and this question it formulated in the following tern:is : ·

¶15

I86o

¶16

Com1nissioner of Income-tax v. Thakur Das Bka.gava

¶17

S. K. Das j.

¶18

"Whether the suin of Rs. 32,500/- received by the assessee in the circumstances set out.in the trust deed later executed by him on August 6, 1945, was his professional income taxable iri his hands, or was·it money received by him on behalf of a trust and not in his capaCity as an individual."

¶19

It appears that in stating a case the Tribunal framed an additional question as to whether the trust was created at or before the payment of Rs. 32,500/-, but expressed the vie.w that this additional question was implicit in the principal question formulated by it. A case was accordingly stated to the High Court under s. 66 of t.he Indian Income-tax Act, and the High Court by its judgment dated August 3, l953, answered· the question in favour of the assessee, holding ·that " the sum of Rs. 32,500/- received by the '' assessee was not received by him as his professional . income but was received on behalf of the trust and not in his capacity as an individual". The appellant then moved the High Court and obtained the certificate of fitness referred to earlier in this judment. ,

¶20

We shall presently state the facts found by the Tribunal in connection with the receipt of the sum of Rs. 32,500/- by the assessee, from which the Tribunal drew its inference. But the question as framed by the Tribt:ina,l a.nd answered :by the· High Court, ·was

¶21

78 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [19~1]

¶22

·-

¶23

whether in the circumstances set out in the trust deed dated August 6, 1945, the amount of Rs. 32,500/- Comn11ss1ourr of I t1Co111e-tax received by the assesRee was professional income in his v hand. 1 t is, therefore, appropriate to refer first to the Thakur Da~ recitals in the trust deed. The respondent stated in Hhargav~ the trust deed that he had " decreased " his legal practice for the last few years and had reserved his S. 1(. Das j. professional iucome accruing after June 1944 for payment of taxes and charity. He then said: "accord-. ingly, I have been acting on that. In the Farrukhnagar, district Gurga.on case, Grown v. Ohuttan Lal etc., the relatives and the accused expressed a strong desire to get the case conducted by me during its trial. At last 011 their pe1siste11ce and promise that they would provide mo with Rs. 40,000/· for ~haritable purposes and I would create a public charitable trust thereof I agreed to conduct the case. The case is now over. The accused and their relatives have given' me Rs. 32,500/- for charity and creating a. trust. Tho said amount has been deposited in the Bank. If they pay any other amount that will also be included in that. Accordingly, I create this trust with the following conditions and with tho said amount and any other amount which may be realized afterwards or included in the trust;". (then followed the name and objects of the trust, etc.). The Trib9nal accepted as correct the statements of the respondent that he was at first. unwilling to accept the brief in the Farrukhnagar case; he was then persuaded to accept it at the request of some members of tho Bar and some influential local people on the understanding, as tho respondent put it, that the accused persons of that case would provide Rs. 40,000/- for a charitable trust which the respondent would create. Eventually, the sum of Rs. 32,500/; was pa.id by or on behalf of the accused persons, and as the Tribunal has put it, ,. charitable trust was created by the respondent by the trust deed dated August 6, 1945, the recitals whereof we have quoted above.

¶24

The question before us is what is the proper legal inference from the aforesaid facts found by the Tribunal. Both the Tribunal and the High Court have drawn the inference that & charitable trust was created

¶25

1 s.c:R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

¶26

¶27

-.._

¶28

by the persons who paid. the money to the assessee, and all that the assessee did uuder the .feed of trust · dated August 6, 1945, was to reduce the terms of the trust to writing. The High Court, therefore, a pp lied the principle laid down J:>y the Privy Council in Raja Bejoy Singh Dudhuria v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal(') and observed that by· tlie overriqing obligation imposed on the assessee by the persons ·who paid the money, the sum of Rs. 32,500/- never became the income of the assessee; and the amount became trust ·property as soon as it was paid, .there being no question of the application of part of his.: income by the assessee.

¶29

r960

¶30

ConimissiOner of Income·tax v. Thakur Das Bhargaua

¶31

S. K. Das].

¶32

On.behalf of the appellant it has been contended that the inference which the Tribunal and the High Court drew is not the:. proper legal inference which flows from the facts found, and according to the learned Attorney-General who appe~red for the appeHant the proper legal inference is that the amount was received by the assessee as his professional income in respect of which he later created a trust by the deed . of. trust dated August 6; 1945. He has submitted t~~t there_ was no trust nor any ~egal obligation imposed on tl!e assessee by the persons wlio paid the money, at the time when. the money was received, which pre. vented. the amount from becoming the profes.sional incom<J of the assessee. · He has also-contended .that even the. existence of a trust wilhnake no difference, unless it can be held that the :money was diverted to that trust before it could become professional income in the hands of the assessee. ' ,. We think that the question raised in this case can be decided by a very short· answer, and that answer js that frorri the facts found by .the Tribunal the proper legal inference is that the·sum of Rs. 32,500/- paid to the .assessee was his prefessional income at the time . when. it was paid and . no trust or obligation in t.he nature of a trust was created !Lt that time, and when the a.ssessee created a trust by the trust deed ·of August 6, 1945, he applied pa.rt of his professional income as trust property. If that is the true conclusion as we hold it to be, then the principle Ia.id down (1) [1933] I I.T.R. i35. .

¶33

80 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1961]

¶34

•

¶35

r96o by the Privy Council in Bejoy-Singh Dudhuria's case(') --:has no application. It is indeed true, a.s has been Co•;:;;;:: of observed by the High Court~ that a trust m~y be v. created by any language sufficient t.o show the mten- Thakvr Da.< tion and uo teohnica.1 worqs a.re necessary. A trust Dhargaoa may even be crested by the usn of wor1h which a.re primarily ords of condition, but such wol'ds will con- s. K. Da• J. stitutc a. trust only " where the requisites of a. trust a.re present, namely, where there are purposes independent of the donee to which the subject-matter of tho gift is required to be applied and an obligation on the donee to satisfy those purposes." The findings of the Tribunal show clearly enough that the persons who paid the sum of Rs. 32,500/- did not use a.riy words of an imperative nature creating a trust or a.n obligation. They were anxious tO have the services of the a.ssessee in the Fa.rrukhnaga.r case; the asseSBee was at first unwilling to give his services and later he a.greed proposing that he would himself create a. charitable trust out of the money paid to him for defending the accused persons in the Farrukhnagar case. The position is clarified beyona any doubt by the statements ma.de in the trust deed of August 6, 1945. The assessee said therein that he was reserving his professional incolll'e as an advocate accruing aftr June, 1944 for payments of taxes and oha.rity and, accordingly, when he received his professional income in the Fa.rrukhnagar case he created a oharita.ble trust out of the money so received. The clear statement in the trust deed, a statement accepted a.a correct by the Tribunal, is that the assessee created a trust on certain conditions etc. It is not stated anywhere that the persons who paid the money created a trust or imposed a. legally enforceable obligation on the assessee. Even in his affidavit the a.ssessee had stated that " it was agreed that the accused would provide Rs. 40,000/- for a charitable trust which I would create in case I defend them, on a.n absolutely clear and expreBB understanding that the money would not be used for any private and persona.I purposes." Even in this affidavit there is no suggestion that the persons who paid the money created the (1) [1933) 1 l.T.R. 135.

¶36

1 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

¶37

¶38

¶39

trust or imposed any obligation on the assessee. It was the create a assessee's own trust out of the voluntary fees paid to him for defendmg • desire . that he would • c the accused persons in the Farrukhnagar case. Such a voluntary desire on the part of the assessee created no trust, nor did it give rise to any legally enforceable obligation. In the circumstances the Appellate Assistant Commissioner rightly pointed out that "if the accused persons had themselves resolved to create a charitable trust in memory of the professional aid rendered to them by the appellant and had made the assessee trustee for the money so paid to him for that purpose, it could, perhaps, be argued that the money paid was earmarked for charity ab initio but of this there was no indication anywhere". In our opinion the view taken by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was the correct view. The money when it was received by the assessee was his professional income, though the assessee had expressed a desire earlier to create a charitable trust out of the money wheri received by him. Once it is held that the amount was received as his professional income, the assessee is clearly liable to pay tax thereon. In our opinion the correct answer to the question referred to the High Court is that the amount of Rs. 32,500/- received by the assessee was professional income taxable in his bands.

¶40

I96o

¶41

oininissioner -. -. of Income·tax v.

¶42

Thakur Das Bhargava

¶43

s. K. Das].

¶44

Learned Counsel for the respondent has referred us to a number of decisions where the principle laid down in Bejoy Singh Dudhuria's Case (¹ ) was applied, and has contended that where there is an allocation of a sum out of revenue a.s a result of an overriding title or obligation before it becomes income in the hands of the assessee, the allocation may be the result of a decree of a. court, an arbitration a.ward or even the provisions of a will or deed. In view of the conclusion at which we have arrived, the decisions relied upon can hardly help and it is unnecessary to consider them. Our conclusion is that there was no overriding obligation imposed on the assessee at the time when the sum of Rs. 32,500/- was received by him.

¶45

{r) [1933] I I.T.R. 135. II

¶46

82 SUPREl\IE COURT REPORTS [1961]

¶47

Accordingly, we allow this appeal and set asido the judgment and order of the High Court. The answer Con1n11ssio11rr of Income-tax to the question is in favour of the appellant, namely, v. that the sum of Rs. 32,500/- received by the asscssee Thr1k.11r Vas was his professional income taxable in his hands. The 1Jhr1rxatia appell11.nt will be entitled to his costs throughout.

S. K. Vas ].

July •8.

Appeal allowed.

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS

¶52

!!.

¶53

}{AJA SYED MOHAMMAD SAADAT ALI KHAN.

¶54

(S. K. DAS, M. HIDAYATULLAH and J.C. SHAH, JJ.)

¶55

Agricultural Income-lax-Additional Collecior-PO'.vcr of Assessment-Amendi11g Act giving retrospective ejfecl to amendecl provisions-Prot-ision for re·vicw in the amendment Act-If offecls the powers of the appellate court-The United Provinces Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1949 (U. P. Ill of 1949)-United Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1901 (U.P. III of 1901).

¶56

The United Provinces Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1949, authorised imposition of a tax on agricultural income within the State, and the agricultural income-tax and 3uper-tax were charged on the total agricultural income of the previous year of the assessee. For the purposes. of the Act the Collector and the Assistant Collector were declared to be the assessing autho- rities within their respective revenue jurisdiction and the expression" Collector" was to have the same meaning as in the United Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1901. Under the rules framed by the government under s. 44 of the Act an assessec having agricultural income in the jurisdiction of more than one assessing authority was to be assessed by the Collector of the district in which he permanently resided. The State Government of 1,;ttar Pradesh appointed :Mr. K. C. Chaudhry under subs. l of s. r4(A) of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act, 1901, to be the Additional Collector in District Bahraich and authorised him to exercise all the powers and perform all the duties of a "Collector " " in all classes of cases", Claiming to exercise the

¶57

The Commisslbner of Income-Tax, Punjab v. Shri Thakur Das Bhargava, Advocate, Hissar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

The Commisslbner of Income-Tax, Punjab v. Shri Thakur Das Bhargava, Advocate, Hissar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Guduthur Bros. versus the Income Tax Officer , Special Circle, Bangalore

Vadilal Panchal versus Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker and Another

State of U.P. versus Deoman Upadhyaya

State of Uttar Pradesh and Others versus Raja Syed Mohammad Saadat Ali Khan

Hoshiarpur Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. versus Commissioner of Income-Tax, Shimla

Raja Sardar Narain and Others versus Raja Sardar Narain and Others.