Setabgunj Sugar Mills Ltd v. The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central, Calcutta

488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1961) '9[60 ]business and trade organised with the object of Th• Ahmedabad di~covering w~ys and means _by which the member-Textile Industry's ~mlls m~y obtam large~ profits m connection with their Research mdustrres. In these circumstances we have no hesi-Association tation in coming to the conclusion that the appellant-v. . association is carrying on an activity which clearly The State [0]1 comes within the definition of the word "industry" in Bombay _ &- Others s. 2[( ]J [') ]an d w ic canno h" h t b e ass1m1 . .1 ate d to a purely wanchoo 1. educational institution. In this view of the matter, when a dispute arose between the appellant and some of its employees, it was an industrial dispute and could be properly referred for adjudication under the Act. The appeal fails and is hereby dismissed with <me set of costs. Appeal dismissed. November r7. SETABGUNJ SUGAR MILLS LTD. v. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL, CALCUTTA. J. L. KAI'UR, M. HrnAYATUI,LAH and J.C. SHAH, JJ. Income Tax-Company having several activities-Set-off of loss in one, when can be claimed agait.sl profits in another-W he-ther activities constitute one business or separate businesses-Mixed question of law and fact-Indian Income Tax Act, r922, (II of r922) ss. 24(2), 66(2). The appellant company which had different ventures claim-ed to set off against the profits of one venture the losses of its other venture which were brought forward from the back years, contending that the losses were of the same business and s. 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act applied. The tribunal rejected the appellants contention and gave reasons why the various activities of the company could not be construed as the same business for the application of s. 24(2). The company then asked the Tribunal to make a reference to the High Court on questions of law arising out of Tribunal's order. The Tribunal declined to make a reference. The com-pany moved the High Court of Calcutta, under s. 66(2) of 2 s.c.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS Income-tax Act, for calling upon the Tribunal to state a case but 1960 the application was summarily dismissed. The company appeal-. ed to the Supreme Court, by special leave, against the decision Setabfiun1 of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and also the order of the Sugar Mills Ltd. Calcutta High Court. v. Hel d , t h at t e quest10n w h · h h et er d1tterent ventures carne · d The Commissioner on y an b in · d' 'd .1v1 ua l or a company orm one usmess is a f b · · m1xe · d oj ncome-tax 1 1 [c ]' question of law and facts. The principle is to find out whether Centra • alrntta. there is any interconnection, any interlacing, any interdepen-dence, any unity at all, embracing the ventures as laid down in Scales v. George Thomp~on & Co. Ltd. These principles have to be applied to the facts before a legal inference can be drawn that a particular business is composed of separate businesses and not one business. The ultimate conclusion is a legal infe-rence from facts proved and is one of mixed law and fact on which application of s. 24(2) of the Act depends. In the instant case a question of law did arise on which the High Court should have asked for a statement of the case. The question of law is "whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the business activities of the company, to wit, manu-facture and sale of sugar and sale and purchase of gunnies, jute, mustard seeds, constituted the same business within the meaning of s. 24(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922". The High Court is directed to call for a statement of the case from the Tribunal and dispose of it according to law. Scales v. 'George Thompson & Co. Ltd., (1927) 13 T. C. 83, relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE Ju&Iso10TI0N: Civil Appeal No. 143 of 1958. Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 15th March, 1955, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal of India, Calcutt.a in I. T. A. No. 4309 of 1954. Civil Appeal No. 144 of 1958. (