Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala vs Justice Kuldip Singh

Following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short, ''the Tribunal''), arising out of its order dated 12-5-1993 in IT Appeal Nos. 1534 and 1535 (Chandi) of 1992, for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that after discontinuance of his legal profession, the arrears of professional receipts are not taxable u/s 176 (4) of the IT Act, 1961?

The assessee claimed that professional receipt as advocate was not liable to be taxed after discontinuation of legal profession on elevation to the Bench. Reliance was placed on judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Justice R.M. Datta, . The Assessing Officer did lot accept the claim, which view was upheld by the CIT(A). On further appeal, the Tribunal accepted the claim of the assessee having regard to provisions of section 176(4) of the income tax Act, 1961 (for short, ''the Act''), as interpreted by the Calcutta High Court in Justice R.M. Datta''s case (supra).

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the findings recorded.

Learned counsel for the revenue has not been able to show any judgment taking a view contrary to what has been taken in Justice R.M. Datta''s case (supra).

We are in respectful agreement with the view taken by the Calcutta High Court in Justice R.M. Datta''s case (supra).

In view of the above, the question referred is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Reference is disposed of accordingly.