1964 (4) TMI 119 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the first proviso to section 10(5)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act.
2. Determination of the actual cost of assets for depreciation purposes.
3. Legitimacy of the conversion of a partnership firm into a private limited company for tax purposes.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Applicability of the first proviso to section 10(5)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act:
The core question referred to the court was whether the first proviso to section 10(5)(a) of the Act applied to the assessee. The assessee, a private limited company formed from an existing registered firm, valued its assets significantly higher than the written down value recorded in the firm's books. The Income-tax Officer, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and the Appellate Tribunal all concluded that the main purpose of this conversion and asset transfer was to reduce income-tax liability by claiming depreciation on the enhanced value. The court upheld this view, stating that the proviso to section 10(5)(a) was indeed applicable, as the main purpose of the asset transfer was to reduce tax liability.

2. Determination of the actual cost of assets for depreciation purposes:
The assessee argued that as a distinct entity from the previous partnership firm, it was entitled to depreciation allowance based on the actual cost of assets to it, not the written down value in the hands of the previous firm. The court noted that while the actual cost to the assessee usually determines the depreciation allowance, this cost must be scrutinized if the transfer's main purpose was tax reduction. The court emphasized that the proviso to section 10(5)(a) allows the Income-tax Officer to determine the actual cost if satisfied that the transfer aimed to reduce tax liability. The Tribunal's decision to fix the value of the assets at Rs. 25,000 above the written down value was upheld, as it was in line with the proviso's stipulations.

3. Legitimacy of the conversion of a partnership firm into a private limited company for tax purposes:
The assessee contended that the conversion was motivated by considerations of efficient business management and protection of private properties, with tax reduction being incidental. The court acknowledged that a business can be conducted in a way that minimizes tax liability legally. However, it found that the significant increase in asset values, without actual change in ownership, indicated that the main purpose of the conversion was indeed tax reduction. The court concluded that the Income-tax Officer was justified in going behind the contractual prices to determine the actual cost, as the enhanced values were substantially disproportionate to the written down values, thereby attracting the proviso to section 10(5)(a).

Conclusion:
The court answered the referred question in the affirmative, confirming that the first proviso to section 10(5)(a) applied to the assessee. The Income-tax Officer's determination of the actual cost, with the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, was upheld. The assessee was directed to pay costs fixed at Rs. 100.