Supreme Court of India
Commissioner of Income-tax/excess Profits Tax, Bombay City v. Messrs. Bhogilal Laherchand Including Batliboi & Co., Bombay
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
3 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
What the Court ordered
We are of the opinion that the answer returned by the High Court of Bombay to the first question referred to it was wrong.
Judgment, page 10
From the headnote
Indian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), s. 42(1)-Scope of. Hindu undivided family was carrying on business in Bom bay, Madras and the Mysore State, being treated as a single asses see and its relevant accounting period was 10th October, 1941, to 8th November, 1942. During this period, the Mysore branch purchased goods from the Bombay head office and the Madras branch of the value of Rs. 2 lakhs odd. The Income- tax Officer estimated these purchases of the Mysore branch in British India at Rs. 3 lakhs and its profits at Rs. 75,000 on the sale of these goods )n Mysore. In view of the provisions
Where later benches applied it
- 1966 S. Srinivasan v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
- 1964 Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat v. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai
- 1963 Philip John Plasket Thomas v. Commissioner of Income Tax Calcutt A
Of those, 3 mentioned
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.