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

1908 Supreme(Mad) 57

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
The Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund Limited
Versus
The Corporation of Madras
Decided On : 05.04.1908

The ordinary and popular meaning of the word 'Capital' and the underlying principle of taxation proportionate to professional incomes influenced the court's decision.

Headnote:

capital - Taxation Dispute - Schedule V of the Municipal Act III of 1904 - Section 123, Madras City Municipal Act, 1904

Fact of the Case:

Dispute between Madras Municipality and Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund, Limited regarding professional tax calculation based on nominal capital or paid-up capital.

Finding of the Court:

The word 'Capital' in Schedule V of the Madras Municipal Act [III of 1904] means paid-up capital.

Issues: Interpretation of the word 'Capital' in Schedule V of the Madras Municipal Act [III of 1904] for professional tax calculation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the word 'Capital' in Schedule V based on the ordinary and popular meaning, underlying principle of taxation proportionate to professional incomes, and previous case law.

Final Decision: The word 'Capital' in Schedule V of the Madras Municipal Act [III of 1904] means paid-up capital for the Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund, Limited.

JUDGMENT

1. The question referred for our decision is Does the word capital used in Schedule V of the Municipal Act III of 1904 mean exclusively nominal capital or does it also include paid-up capital and, if so, should it be taken to mean paid-up capital exclusively?

2. The law (Section 176, Madras City Municipal Act, 1904) hardly contemplates a reference in such general and abstract terms. It only empowers the Magistrates to state a case on any appeal before them and refer the same for the decision of the High Court, that is, to state all the matters necessary for the decision of the particular case before them on appeal and to refer the case so stated for decision. The facts are, however, fully stated in the reference, and we proceed to deal with them.

3. The case arises out of a dispute between the Madras Municipality and the Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund, Limited, as to the basis on which the fund should be charged with professional tax. The Municipality claims to tax the fund under Clause I(a) of Schedule V on its nominal capital. The Fund contends that it should be taxed under Clause I(b) of the Schedule on its paid-up capital.

4. Under Clause I(a) joint stock companies and other companies carrying on any trade or business having gain for its object, or as benefit societies, and the capital of which exceeds 20 lakhs of rupees are liable to a tax of Rs. 500. Under Clause I(b) the companies are liable to a tax of Rs. 350 if their capital exceeds 18 lakhs but does not exceed 20 lakhs of rupees.

5. The fund is registered under the Indian Companies Act and has a declared nominal capital of Rs. 29,99,976 divided into 357,168 shares of Rs. 84 of each.

6. These shares cannot be acquired at once by a lump payment but are subscribed for by payment of one rupee per mensem extending over a period of 7 years which payments cannot be demanded in advance. It is admitted for the purpose of the present reference that the amount actually subscribed or the paid-up capital, is about 12 lakhs of rupees.

7. It will be observed that in Schedule V the word "capital" is used without any qualification. No definition of the word is given in the Act. For the Municipality it is contended that the meaning of the word will vary according to the nature of the Company which is Being taxed.

8. It is pointed out that the Fund is a Company limited by shares such as is contemplated by Sections 8 and 45 of the Indian Companies Act VI of 1882 and that in those sections capital is used in the sense of nominal capital. It is, therefore, argued that the word capital in Schedule V used in regard to Companies such as the fund must mean nominal capital. The Indian Companies Act cannot, however, be properly resorted to to determine the meaning of words in the Municipal Act, for the two acts are not in part materia. (Maxwell: Interpretation of Statutes, 4th edition, page 56). The word "capital" used by itself may signify many different things. In the absence of a definition in the Municipal Act the presumption is that the word is used in that Act in its ordinary and popular meaning - Maxwell: Interpretation of Statutes, 4th edition on page 2, and Venkatram Chetty v. The Emperor I.L.R. (1904) M. 17. The ordinary and popular meaning of the word is undoubtedly money actually contributed for employment in business. It is defined in Whartons Law Lexicon as the sum of money which a merchant, banker, or trader adventures in any undertaking or which he contributes to the common stock of a partnership, and also as the fund of a trading company or Corporation. The ordinary and popular meaning seems to express the real intention of the Legislature. When Schedule V is read as a whole the underlying principle seems to be that taxation should be roughly proportionate to the professional incomes of individuals and the profits of companies. Section 123 of the Act which lays down that a person who exercises more than one profession shall be chargeable under the class appropriate to his aggr

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top