Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.20 seconds)
Documents citing Nahalchand Laloochand vs Commissioner Of Excess Profits Tax, ... on 27 August, 1953

Narottam Morarji And Co. vs Commissioner Of Excess Profits Tax on 25 June, 1976

In Nahalchand Laloochand v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax the scheme of the third proviso to rule 1 of Schedule I to the Act was considered. It was held that the power of apportionment given to the Excess Profits Tax Officer under the third proviso to rule 1 of Schedule I of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, is with regard to profits and not with regard to items in the profit and loss account of the assessee. The assessee-firm in that case was the selling agent of a mill. The assessee's accounting period was the year commencing from 5th November, 1945, to 24th October, 1946. The income-tax authorities held that a certain sum credited in the books of account of the assessee on 20th December, 1945, represented undisclosed profits of the assessee from business. In computing the profits of the assessee for the chargeable accounting period ending 31st March, 1946, the Excess Profits Tax Officer, acting under the third proviso to rule 1 of Schedule I, apportioned the profits of the assessee other than the sum credited on 20th December, 1945, on the ground that sum constituted profits of a business which had ceased to exist and the income from which was received and ascertained prior to the end of the chargeable accounting period. The Division Bench of this court held that the sum was not profit of the assessee on 20th December, 1945, but was only a receipt and the profits were what were ascertained to be profits at the end of the accounting period. Consequently, the Excess Profits Tax officer was not entitled to exclude that sum from the apportionment. For coming this conclusion Chagla C.J. considered the scheme of the Act and at page 623 observed :
Bombay High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - V D Tulzapurkar - Full Document
1