TMI Blog1949 (3) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, Ltd., Bombay, on 8th September, 1944, and on 22nd December, 1944, respectively, are subject to tax. The company came to receive these two sums in these circumstances. A fire broke out in the company's mills on 18th January, 1944, with the result that the buildings, etc., were destroyed and there was a cessation of the manufacturing activities of the company. The company had taken out a p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course of the business of the company. In my opinion, that contention is fallacious. These sums received by the company represent the profits which the company would have earned but for the fact of the fire having broken out. They take the place of the profits which would normally have been earned by the company and clearly as profits which would also be available for distribution to the sharehol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... took the view that the insurance receipt was the product of a revenue payment prudently made by the respondents to secure that the gains which might have been expected to accrue to them had there been no fire should not be lost, but should be replaced by a sum equivalent to their estimated amount. Their Lordships also took the view that the receipt was one of which it could fairly be said that it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the risk insured against materialized. Sir Jamshedji has attempted to distinguish this case on the ground that the Privy Council was considering the British Columbia Taxation Act and it would be unwise to apply those observations of the Privy Council based upon the construction of one taxation statute to the provisions of a different taxation statute. But as I read the judgment of the Privy C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
