9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Taxability of the sum received by the assessee from Lord Inchcape. 2. Determination of the nature of the sum for income tax assessment. 3. Applicability of Section 4(3)(vii) for exemption from income tax. Analysis: 1. The case involved the taxability of a sum of &8377; 7,822 received by the assessee from Lord Inchcape. The sum was paid to the assessee as a gratuity after the company he worked for went into liquidation. The question was whether this sum is taxable in the hands of the assessee. 2. The sum in question was assessed under Section 6(vi) and Section 12 of the Act as income derived from "other sources." However, it was argued that the payment was not a regular income but a windfall. The judgment referred to Commissioner of Income-tax, Bengal v. Shaw Wallace and Company, highlighting that income under the Act connotes a periodical return from definite sources, excluding windfalls. It was concluded that the sum was not chargeable under Sections 6 and 7 or Section 12 of the Act. 3. The assessee contended that the payment was exempted from income tax under Section 4(3)(vii) as it was of a casual and non-recurring nature. The payment did not arise from the exercise of an occupation but was a spontaneous and generous action by Lord Inchcape to help the assessee in a time of trouble. Citing various cases, the judgment supported the argument that the sum fell under the exemption criteria of Section 4(3)(vii) and was not taxable. In conclusion, the Court answered the question regarding the taxability of the sum received by the assessee in the negative. Baguley, J., and Ba U, J., concurred with the decision.
|
