HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
P. B. MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI MUKHERJI
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, W. B. III - Appellant
Versus
CHUNILAL PRABHUDAS AND CO. (DEFUNCT FIRM) - Respondent
Income-Tax Reference 39 Of 1967
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 11, 1969
CAPITAL GAINS - INCOME TAX ACT, 1922, SECTION 12-B - GOODWILL - Whether goodwill is a capital asset within the meaning of Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922.
Fact of the Case:
The assessee, a registered firm of six partners, transferred its assets and goodwill to two private limited companies on the last day of the accounting year. The Income-tax Officer included the entire amount of the consideration received for the goodwill as the assessee's capital gain under Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner reduced the amount of capital gains. The Tribunal deleted the amount of capital gains assessed by the Income-tax Officer.
Finding of the Court:
Goodwill is not a capital asset within the meaning of Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The transfer of the assessee's goodwill to the two private limited companies did not produce any profit or gain within the meaning of Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922.
Issues: Whether goodwill is a capital asset within the meaning of Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922.
Ratio Decidendi: The definition of capital asset in Section 2(4a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, is not exhaustive. The residuary expression "property of any kind" includes goodwill. However, the inclusion of goodwill within the meaning of capital asset for the purpose of Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922, would be repugnant to the subject or context. Goodwill is not a tangible property like stock in trade, personal effects, or land from which agricultural income is derived. Goodwill is indivisible and cannot be sold, transferred, or dealt with in fragments or fractions. There is no profit or gain in the transfer of goodwill when the consideration for the transfer is the issuance of shares of the transferee company to the transferor.
Final Decision: The Tribunal was right in holding that no capital gains could arise under Section 12-B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 out of the transfer by the firm of its goodwill to the two private limited companies.
( 1 ) THE statement of the case raises the following question for an answer by this Court :--"whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that no capital gains could arise under Section 12-B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 out of the transfer by the firm of its assets and goodwill to the two private limited companies?"
( 2 ) BEFORE proceeding to answer this question it will be appropriate to reframe the question by dropping the words "assets and" from the question because no argument has been advanced before us either on behalf of the assessee or the Commissioner on assets other than goodwill. The controversy is confined in this case only to goodwill and nothing else. In fact, no question arises with regard to other assets from the order of the Tribunal. The question re-framed, therefore, for the answer by this Court is as follows :--"whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that no capital gains could arise under Section 12-B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 out of the transfer by the firm of its goodwill to the two private limited companies?"
( 3 ) THE facts giving rise to this question are as follows : The assessment year is 1957-58 with the corresponding accounting year ending on 3-11-56. During this accounting year the assessee was a registered firm of six partners deriving income from import and export business. Its head office was in Calcutta and two branches in Bombay. On the very last day of this accounting year the assessee transferred its assets and liabilities and also the goodwill of its Calcutta business to a private limited company under the name Messrs. Chunilal Prabhudas and Co. , Calcutta Private Ltd. , and the assets and liabilities and also the goodwill of its Bombay business- to another company under the name Messrs. Chunilal Prabhudas Si Co. , Bombay Private Ltd. These transfers were made by two registered deeds both dated the 3rd November 1956, The assessee valued its goodwill for the Calcutta business and the Bombay business at Rs. 60,000/- each and received the total amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- in respect of the transfer of such goodwill. About the composition of the two companies to which this transfer was made the fact is that there were altogether 13 shareholders in the two companies consisting only of the six partners and their sons and wives. The consideration for the goodwill of the firm was not paid in cash but was paid for by the two companies by allocation of companies' shares representing the share of the each partner. In other words, the shareholder got as many shares of the company as his share in the partnership would justify. These are the basic and relevant facts.
( 4 ) THE Income-tax Officer included the entire amount of this sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- allocated towards the goodwill of the firm as the firms' capital gain under Section 12-B of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The Income-tax Officer rejected the assessee's contention that the goodwill being an intangible asset did not come within the definition of a capital asset in Section 2 (4a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee could not satisfy the Income-tax Officer regarding the value of the goodwill as on 1-1-54 and the Income-tax Officer, therefore, was of the opinion that the acquisition of goodwill did not cost the assessee anything. The Income-tax Officer, therefore, held that the entire amount of Rs. 1,20,000/-was to be assessed as the assessee's capital gains. On appeal the Appellate Assistant Commissioner remanded the case to the Income-tax Officer for ascertaining the value of the goodwill of the firm as on 1-1-54. In answering the remand the Income-tax Officer reported that on the basis of the two years' purchase price of the average profits for the immediately preceding five years the value of the goodwill would amount to Rs. 73,886/- on 1-1-54. On the basis of that report, the Appellate Assistant Commissi
REFERRED TO : Commr.of Income-tax, Calcutta v. Mungneeram Bangur and Co.
Jogta Coal Co. Ltd. v. Commr. of I.T., West Bengal
Tata Hydro-Electric Agency Co. Ltd. v. Commr. of Income-tax
Commr. of Income-tax, Gujarat v. B.M.Kharwar
Revenue of Commr. of Income-tax, Calcutta v. Associated Clothiers Ltd.
Cambatta and Co. Ltd. v. Commr. of Excess Profits Tax, Bombay
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.