http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7
PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,WEST BENGAL
Vs.
RESPONDENT: CALCUTTA AGENCY LTD.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21/12/1950
BENCH: KANIA, HIRALAL J. (CJ) BENCH: KANIA, HIRALAL J. (CJ) SASTRI, M. PATANJALI DAS, SUDHI RANJAN
CITATION: 1951 AIR 108 1950 SCR 1008 CITATOR INFO : D 1965 SC1905 (6) R 1976 SC 772 (6)
ACT: lndian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), ss. 10 (2) (xv), 66--Reference--Jurisdiction of High Court--Duty to decide case on facts stated by Tribunal--Accepting arguments of counsel as poved facts and basing decision on them, impro- priety of--Buisness expenditure-Payments to avoid disclosure of misfeasance of directors--Burden of proof
HEADNOTE: The jurisdiction of the High Court in the matter of mooroetax references is an advisory jurisdiction and under the Incometax Act the decision of the Appellate Tribunal on facts is final unless it can be successfully assailed on the ground that thoro was 1009 no evidence for the conclusions on facts recorded by the Tribunal. It is therefore the duty of the High Court to start by looking at the facts found by the Tribunal and answer the questions of law on that footing. It is not proper to depart from this rule of law as it will convert the High Court into a fact finding authority, which it is not, under the advisory jurisdiction. As the statement of tile Case prepared by the...