SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Cal) 73

SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE, SUDHINDRA MOHAN GUHA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
CALCUTTA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.Bagchi, D.PAL, J.C.SAHA, S.C.CHAKRABARTY

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.

( 1 ) IN this reference under Section 256 (1) of the I. T. Act, 1961, read with Section 19 of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, the following question has been referred to us :"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Debenture Sinking Fund of Rs. 2,32,8,123, Replacement and Contingencies Fund of Rs. 6,97,90,155 and Contingency Reserve Fund of Rs. 69,92,624 constituted reserves for the purpose of computing the capital of the assessee-company under the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?"

( 2 ) THE assessee is the Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. , and the relevant assessment year is 1963-64. The assessee-company claimed as part of its Capital Debenture Sinking Fund Rs. 2,32,08,123, Reserve for Plant Expansion Rs. 6,97,90,155 and Contingency Reserve Fund of Rs. 69,92,624 to be part of its capital. The ITO rejected the assessee's claim on the ground that the funds were not allowable for the capital computation to arrive at the standard deduction for a determination of the tax liability under the S. P. T. Act, 1963. Being aggrieved by this order, the assessee went up in appe





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top