Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1936 (3) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 31st December, 1933, the sum of ₹ 38,965 on account of commission for the six months ended 31st December 1933. The assessee was a firm, which was acting as selling agents for a company known as Morarji Goculdas Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd. under an agreement dated the 13th of January 1930, which is Ex. A. Under that agreement the firm got commission on goods which it sold on behalf of the company, and also on goods which the company sold directly to upcountry dealers. The system of accounting adopted by the firm was the method which is known as the mercantile method, that is to say, it accounted on the basis of commission earned, and not on the basis of commission actually paid. The system prevailed down to the accounting peri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bt, is not income, and that a debt accrued is not income accrued, but there is nothing in the case to show that the Income Tax Ordinance, which fell to be construed by the Board, contained the words income profits and gains. At any rate, the only word with which the Privy Council were concerned in that case was the word income. They were dealing with an assessee who had not a business but was entitled to interest on a single sum; so that the only question was whether interest which had been earned but was not paid amounted to income, and the Privy Council held that it did not. Although an unpaid debt is not an income, it may be-as it seems to me-profits or gains, if it is treated as profits or gains in the system of accounting adopted by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ght to answer the question in the affirmative. Costs to be paid by the assessee on the Original Side scale. With regard to the costs, we held yesterday (judgment reported as Gopal Vajinath Manohar v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay, 4 I.T.R. 417) that the deposit paid under S. 66(2) is part of the assessee's costs of the reference. In the present case the assessee is ordered to pay the costs on the Original Side scale, in accordance with the ordinary practice. But now that the position of the deposit of ₹ 100 has been brought to our attention, I think the proper order to make, where the assessee is directed to pay costs and there is nothing to suggest that the application was improper or frivolous, is that the assessee shoul .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates