SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
11th November 1954
M.C. MAHAJAN C.J.I., S.R. DAS, BHAGWATI AND VENKATARAMA AYYAR JJ.
Kishan Prasad & Co. Ltd. Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 109 of 1953.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Naunit La1, Advocate, for Appellant; Mr. Porus A. Mehta, Advocate instructed by R. H. Dhebar, Agent, for Respondent.
The assessee company was formed in 19, 17. In 1933 another Public Limited Company was incorporated by the name of Sarswati Sugar Syndicate Ltd. K, Managing Director of the assessee company, entered into an agreement with the Sugar Company in March 1933 whereby the assessee company was to invest Rs. 5 lakhs in the sugar company in lieu of which it was to be given the managing agency of the third mill of the Sugar Company when such mill was erected (it was expected to be erected in 1933), on the same terms as given by the Sugar Company to other managing agents of their two other existing mills. It was further agreed that if the third mill was not erected then the Sugar Company was to pay to the assessee company Rs. 15,000 as commission upon the moneys invested by
1. Affirming A. I. R. 1949 Bom. 377.
them in shares. There was subsequently a modification to the effect that the assessee company would themselves subscribe to shares worth Rs. 3 lakhs and the remaining shares of Rs. 2 lakhs will be subscribed to by their friends. 3,000 shares of the value of Rs. 3 lakhs were purchased and share certificates duly issued by the Sugar Company to the assessee company. K was made a director of the Sugar Company. The third mill was, however, not erected and the agreement about organising the managing agency fell through. Subsequently the assessee company decided to sell all the shares in 1941. 2,000 shares were first sold and brought an excess amount of Rs. 20,000 over the original cost price. The remaining 1,000 shares were sold in 1943 and they brought in an excess realisation of Rs. 2,26,700. Both these amounts were taxed by the Income-tax Officer as revenue receipts.
The assessee companys contention that the excess was in the nature of Capital appreciation was not accepted.
Held (allowing the appeal)1 : It seems that the object of the assessee Company in buying shares was purely to obtain the managing agency of the third mill which no doubt would have been an asset of an enduring nature and would have brought them profits but there was from the inception no intention whatever on the part of the assessee company to re-sell the shares either at a profit or otherwise deal in them. Naturally when the third mill was not erected and the object of securing the managing agency became in possible of fulfilment the assessee company withdrew the shares and sold them at a profit. After conceding that the taking up of the shares of Rs. 3 lakhs by the assessee company in the Sugar Company was an essential part of the arrangement arrived at, the only reasonable conclusion to which the High Court should have come was that the investment of the money in the purchase of shares was of a capital nature and the profits arising out of the sale of the shares in the circumstances of this case were accretions to capital and were not liable to tax. The purchase of shares to the tune of Rs. 3 lakhs was an investment and not an adventure and the two sums which were taxed were not in the nature of income from business and were therefore not liable to tax.
Judgement
MAHAJAN C.J.I. : This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab at Simla, dated 18-6-1951, delivered on a reference under S. 66, Indian Income -tax Act, whereby the High Court answered the following two referred questions in the affirmative :
" 1. Whether on a proper construction of the relevant clauses of the Appellant Company s Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association and on a consideration of the circumstances in which the shares of the Sarswati Sugar Syndicate were purchased and sold, it could be held that the purchase and sale of such shares was a part of Appellant Company s business deal?
2. Whether in the circumstances of the case, the excess of Rs. 20,000 realised in the assessment year 1942-43 and Rs. 2,26,700 in the year 1944-45 was a revenue receipt chargeable to tax under S. 3, Income-tax Act, and was not a mere appreciation of capital?"
2. The questions arose in the following circumstances: The assessee, a Public Limited Company, which is the appellant before us, was formed in 1917 with the following objects :
" (a) To undertake and carry on the general business and trade of commission agents. Insurance Agents, Commercial Agents, Export and Import Agents, Clearing and Forwarding or House or Land Agents, Bankers and merchants of every description or any other work calculated directly or indirectly to benefit the company, to raise or take up or advance moneys on loan, deposit, debentures, securities or otherwise, and to deal in money notes, bills, Hundies and other securities.
(b) To take on lease, trust or in exchange and otherwise acquire lands, buildings, machinery manufactures and other property.
(c) To encourage, originate, finance or undertake the management of commercial and industrial undertakings, and to help or to support any charitable, educational or public objects and institution.
(d) To generally do and perform all such acts and things as may be necessary, incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects, and to do any other work or business of any other nature or description, the company may decide to do."
3. In 1933, another Public Limited Company was incorporated by the name of Sarswati Sugar Syndicate Ltd., hereinafter called the Sugar Company. Lala Kishan Prasad, managing Director of the assessee Company, entered into an agreement with the Sugar Company in March 1933 whereby the assessee company was to invest Rs. 5,00,000 in the Sugar Company in lieu of which it was to be given the managing agency of the third mill of the Sugar Company--not in existence at the time but expected to be erected in 1933-when such mill was erected, on the same terms as given by the Sugar Company to other managing agents of their two other existing mills.
The investment of Rs. 5,00,000 by the assessee company was made conditional on the Sugar Company receiving other applications for shares to the tune of at least Rs. 7, 00,000. It was further agreed that if the third mill was not erected then the Sugar Company was to pay to the assessee company Rs. 15,000 as commission upon the moneys invested by them in shares. There was subsequently a modification to the effect that the assessee company would themselves subscribe to shares worth Rs. 3,00,000 and the remaining shares of Rs. 2,00,000 will be subscribed to by their friends. 3,000 shares of the value of Rs. 3,00,000 were purchased and share certificates duly issued by the Sugar Company to the assessce company. Lala Kishan Prasad was made a director of the Sugar Company. The third mill was, however, not erected and the agreement about acquiring the managing agency fell through Lala Kishan Prasad died in December 1940 and the assessee Company decided to sell all the shares in 1941.
It is admitted that 2,000 shares were first sold and brought an excess amount of Rs. 20,000 over the original cost price. The remaining 1,000 shares were sold in 1943 and they brought in an excess realisation of Rs. 2,26,700. Both these amount
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.