Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1949 DIGILAW 38 (PAT)

Bar Council, Patna High Court v. Commissioner Of Income Tax

1949-08-17

AGARWALA, MEREDITH

body1949
Judgment 1. This is a reference under Sec. 66 (1), Income-tax Act. The question referred to this Court is "whether the income received by the Bar Council, Patna High Court by way of fees paid by the advocates for enrolling themselves to prectice in the High Court and/or registration fee from apprentices of law is exempt under Section 4 (3) (i), Income-tax Act." 2. The Bar Council maintains a list of advocates, and it is condition precedent to the right to practise in this Court that an advocate should be on the list maintained by the Bar Council. In order to have his name on this list an advocate is charged a fee prescribed by the Bar Council. A further condition to practice in this Court is that an advocate shall have served a certain term of apprenticeship with an advocate whose name appears on a list of advocates maintained by the Bar Council and approved by the High Court. These appear to be the only functions of the Bar Council with which we are concerned. The question referred to us is whether the fees realized by the Council for putting an advocates name on the list of advocates and the registration fee for apprentices for their training under an advocate approved by the Bar Council are exempt from income-tax. The question specifically refers to Sec. 4 (3) (i) Section 4 (3) provides that: "Any income, profits or gains falling within the following classes shall not be included in the total income of the person receiving them." Clause (i) is: "Any income derived from property held under trust or other legal obligation wholly for religious or charitable purposes, and in the case of property so held in part only for such purposes, the income applied, or finally set apart for application, thereto." 3. It is quite obvious that fees received by the Bar Council for enrolling advocates or for registering apprentices is not income derived from property held under trust or other legal obligation. The same view was taken by the Madras High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras V/s. Bar Council, Madras, (1943) 11 I. T. R. 1 : (A.I.R. (30) 1943 Mad. 137). The answer to the question referred to us, therefore, must be in the negative. The Income-tax Department is entitled to the costs of the reference which we assess at Rs. 250.