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

1964 Supreme(Cal) 26

S.P.Mitra, K.C.Sen
Mannalal Ratanlal – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.C. Pal, J.B. Pal, E.R. Meyer, B.L. Pal

Judgment

SHANKAR PRASAD MITRA, J.

1. THIS is a reference under s. 66(1) of the Indian IT Act, 1922. The assessment year is 1952-53. The corresponding accounting year is 2007-8 Dewali. The assessee is a partner in the registered firm of M/s Sadhuram Tolaram. From this firm the assessee derived one-third of the income in each of the three heads, namely, property, business and other sources. In the year of account relevant to the said assessment year, the assessee borrowed a certain sum of money for the purpose of paying income-tax in respect of assessments for preceding years. The assessee paid a sum of Rs. 1,934 (Rupees one thousand and nine hundred and thirty-four) as interest on this borrowing.

2. THE ITO refused to allow deduction of this sum of interest from the total income of the assessee. Before the AAC the assessee contended that if he had not borrowed money, he would have been compelled to liquidate part of his income yielding assets, which would have resulted in the reduction of his assessable income. It was said that the borrowings was for the purpose of maintaining income-yielding assets intact. THE AAC held that there was no connection between the expenditure incurred and














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