In Re: Makhan Lal Ram sarup

Walsh, J.—We are clearly of opinion that the Commissioner was right in this case in holding that no question of law arises. The question whether an assessee is a member of a joint family sharing in the funds, or whether he is separate, is a pure question of fact which must be tried according to law like every other question of fact. It is desirable to point out that Section 66 under the new Act does not give a right of appeal. Persons assessed to Income Tax should clearly understand that this Court is not a Court of appeal to which resort may be had if they happen to be dissatisfied with the decision against them. There is no such thing as a memorandum of appeal. If the Commissioner is satisfied that there is a point of law on which he requires the opinion of this Court, he seeks the opinion by stating a case. If, as in this case, he holds that there is no point of law, the assessee has to satisfy two Judges of this Court that a distinct point of law was raised before the Commissioner, and treated by the Commissioner as a mere question of fact. It must also clearly be understood that this Court cannot listen to suggested points of law, which were not first taken in the original proceedings before the Income Tax Officer, and also submitted clearly and definitely to the Commissioner by way of appeals, so as to enable him to pass a decision upon them, and to set out the facts in stating the case, which raise the law point. We are clearly of opinion that no question of law arises. The application is dismissed.