http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8
PETITIONER: THE LIQUIDATORS OF PURSA LIMITED
Vs.
RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BIHAR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/02/1954
BENCH: DAS, SUDHI RANJAN BENCH: DAS, SUDHI RANJAN MAHAJAN, MEHAR CHAND (CJ) HASAN, GHULAM JAGANNADHADAS, B.
CITATION: 1954 AIR 253 1954 SCR 767 CITATOR INFO : E 1954 SC 470 (65) D 1961 SC 398 (7,10,12,16) R 1965 SC 33 (6) F 1965 SC1358 (11,23) RF 1969 SC 869 (5) R 1971 SC 794 (12)
ACT: Income-tax Act (XI of 1922) s. 10(2) (vii) proviso 2--Any such machinery or plant must have been used in the accounting year--Section 66--Finding of fact--When appeal court can intervene.
HEADNOTE: The fundamental idea underlying the words used in the definition of "business" in s. 2(4) of the Income- tax Act the continuous exercise of an activity and the same central idea is implicit in the words "carried on by him" occurring in 10(1) and those critical words are an essential constituent that which is to be produce the taxable income, and therefore the 768 tax is payable only in respect of the profits or gains of the business which is carried on by the assessee. That under clause (vii) of s. 10(2) the machinery and plant must be such as were used at least for a part of the accounting year. As the machinery and plant of the sugar factory whi...