1964 (7) TMI 8 - SC - Income Tax

Whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of section 25(3) in respect of the interest on securities ? Held that - The schemes of section 25(3) and section 26(2) proviso are different. The first grants an exemption because there has been a double levy of tax and an intention to exempt all income profits and gains of business from taxation may be attributed to the legislature. Section 26(2) fastens liability of the predecessor if he cannot be found upon the successor and must be strictly construed. The legislature has imposed by section 26(2) liability upon the successor to be assessed for profits earned in business carried on by his predecessor and unless there is a clear intention expressed in the statute to include in that expression what in reality is not income but is deemed income the liability to assessment would justifiably be limited to profits of the business which is computable under section 10. Appeal dismissed.

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to the benefit of Section 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of interest on securities.
2. Interpretation of Section 25(3) regarding the scope of income exempted from tax.
3. Applicability of Section 8 versus Section 10 for interest on securities.
4. The concept of double taxation under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1918, and its impact on the exemption under Section 25(3).
5. The relevance of the heads of income under Section 6 for tax computation.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Entitlement to the Benefit of Section 25(3) in Respect of Interest on Securities:
The core issue was whether the firm, which received interest on securities, was entitled to claim exemption under Section 25(3) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The firm argued that since it was carrying on business before the enactment of the 1922 Act and had been taxed under the 1918 Act, it should be exempt from paying tax on income earned in the relevant previous year upon discontinuation of its business.

2. Interpretation of Section 25(3) Regarding the Scope of Income Exempted from Tax:
Section 25(3) states: "Where any business, profession or vocation on which tax was at any time charged under the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1918, is discontinued...no tax shall be payable in respect of the income, profits and gains of the period between the end of the previous year and the date of such discontinuance." The court had to determine whether this exemption applied to all income derived from the business or only to income chargeable under the head "profits and gains of business, profession or vocation."

3. Applicability of Section 8 versus Section 10 for Interest on Securities:
The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the interest on securities should be assessed under Section 8, not Section 10, thus denying the exemption. The Tribunal, however, reversed this decision, stating that the firm was entitled to the exemption for the entire income, including interest on securities, upon discontinuation of the business.

4. The Concept of Double Taxation Under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1918, and Its Impact on the Exemption Under Section 25(3):
The court noted that under the 1918 Act, income was taxed in the year it was earned, leading to double taxation when the 1922 Act was enacted. Section 25(3) was designed to mitigate this by exempting income from double taxation upon discontinuation of the business. The court emphasized that the exemption was intended to cover all income derived from the business activity, not just income under a specific head.

5. The Relevance of the Heads of Income Under Section 6 for Tax Computation:
The court discussed the scheme of the Act, which categorizes income under various heads for computation purposes but does not charge each head separately. It was highlighted that income from securities, even if part of the business's stock-in-trade, should be assessed under Section 8. The court concluded that the exemption under Section 25(3) was not limited to income chargeable under Section 10 but extended to all income derived from the business.

Conclusion:
The court held that the firm was entitled to the benefit of Section 25(3) for the interest on securities. It was determined that the exemption applied to the entirety of the business income, including interest on securities, upon the discontinuation of the business. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's decision that the exemption under Section 25(3) was not restricted to income chargeable under Section 10 but included all income derived from the business.

← Previous Next →