Home / Supreme Court / Diary 43/1950

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/EXCESSPROFITS TAX, BOMBAY CITY v. MESSRS. BHOGILAL LAHERCHAND includingBATLIBOI & CO., BOMB

Supreme Court of India | Diary 43/1950

Status

Judgment

Decided On

1953-12-18

Bench

MAHAJAN, MEHR CHAND

Petitioner

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/EXCESSPROFITS TAX, BOMBAY CITY

Respondent

MESSRS. BHOGILAL LAHERCHAND includingBATLIBOI & CO., BOMB

Check another SC case

Full Judgment Text

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7

PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/EXCESSPROFITS TAX, BOMBAY CITY

Vs.

RESPONDENT: MESSRS. BHOGILAL LAHERCHAND includingBATLIBOI & CO., BOMBAY

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/12/1953

BENCH: MAHAJAN, MEHR CHAND BENCH: MAHAJAN, MEHR CHAND DAS, SUDHI RANJAN HASAN, GHULAM JAGANNADHADAS, B.

CITATION: 1954 AIR 155 1953 SCR 444

ACT: Indian Income-tax Act (Xlof 1922), s. 42(1)-Scope of.

HEADNOTE: A Hindu undivided family was carrying on business in Bombay, Madras and the Mysore, being treated as a single assessee and its relevant accounting period was 10th October, 1941, to 8th November, 1942. During this period, the Mysore branch purchased goods from the Bombay head office and the Madras branch of the value of Rs’ 2 lakhs odd. The In tax ’Officer estimated these purchases of the Mysore in British India at Its. 3 lakhs and its profits at Rs 75,000 on the sale of these goods in Mysore. In view of the provisions of s. 42 of the Indian Income-tax Act, half of this profit, i.e., to the extent of Rs. 37,500, was deemed to accrue or arise in British India because of the business connection of the L non-resident branch in British India: Held, that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer was right in applying the provisions of s. 42 1 of the Income-tax Act and holding that RS. 37,500 were deemed to accru...

Related

High Court Case Status

Check case status for High Courts across India