Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 1976 (11) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1976 (11) TMI 2 - SC - Income Tax


  1. 1997 (10) TMI 4 - SC
  2. 1997 (3) TMI 10 - SC
  3. 1996 (12) TMI 2 - SC
  4. 1990 (2) TMI 1 - SC
  5. 1988 (5) TMI 360 - SC
  6. 1988 (5) TMI 6 - SC
  7. 2022 (5) TMI 800 - HC
  8. 2020 (9) TMI 822 - HC
  9. 2015 (2) TMI 212 - HC
  10. 2014 (3) TMI 219 - HC
  11. 2013 (3) TMI 265 - HC
  12. 2011 (3) TMI 1382 - HC
  13. 2011 (3) TMI 751 - HC
  14. 2010 (3) TMI 186 - HC
  15. 2009 (10) TMI 52 - HC
  16. 2007 (12) TMI 184 - HC
  17. 2007 (1) TMI 165 - HC
  18. 2005 (7) TMI 91 - HC
  19. 2005 (2) TMI 46 - HC
  20. 2005 (2) TMI 66 - HC
  21. 1999 (11) TMI 13 - HC
  22. 1995 (11) TMI 21 - HC
  23. 1993 (7) TMI 43 - HC
  24. 1989 (7) TMI 94 - HC
  25. 1989 (7) TMI 49 - HC
  26. 1988 (5) TMI 22 - HC
  27. 1986 (9) TMI 10 - HC
  28. 1986 (8) TMI 14 - HC
  29. 1985 (12) TMI 20 - HC
  30. 1985 (11) TMI 21 - HC
  31. 1983 (6) TMI 3 - HC
  32. 1982 (7) TMI 33 - HC
  33. 1982 (1) TMI 58 - HC
  34. 1981 (5) TMI 22 - HC
  35. 1981 (5) TMI 23 - HC
  36. 1980 (10) TMI 67 - HC
  37. 1980 (10) TMI 54 - HC
  38. 1980 (8) TMI 27 - HC
  39. 1979 (8) TMI 53 - HC
  40. 1979 (8) TMI 58 - HC
  41. 1978 (10) TMI 22 - HC
  42. 1978 (9) TMI 46 - HC
  43. 1978 (6) TMI 51 - HC
  44. 2024 (10) TMI 327 - AT
  45. 2024 (3) TMI 1005 - AT
  46. 2023 (11) TMI 1101 - AT
  47. 2023 (10) TMI 1131 - AT
  48. 2023 (6) TMI 1110 - AT
  49. 2022 (9) TMI 1460 - AT
  50. 2022 (12) TMI 160 - AT
  51. 2022 (8) TMI 444 - AT
  52. 2022 (7) TMI 954 - AT
  53. 2022 (6) TMI 1269 - AT
  54. 2022 (4) TMI 1525 - AT
  55. 2022 (3) TMI 230 - AT
  56. 2021 (4) TMI 1157 - AT
  57. 2020 (10) TMI 938 - AT
  58. 2019 (9) TMI 902 - AT
  59. 2019 (1) TMI 877 - AT
  60. 2017 (6) TMI 1323 - AT
  61. 2017 (4) TMI 967 - AT
  62. 2016 (12) TMI 1875 - AT
  63. 2016 (10) TMI 56 - AT
  64. 2016 (2) TMI 170 - AT
  65. 2015 (8) TMI 1464 - AT
  66. 2015 (8) TMI 1029 - AT
  67. 2015 (7) TMI 1344 - AT
  68. 2015 (3) TMI 1135 - AT
  69. 2015 (2) TMI 987 - AT
  70. 2014 (8) TMI 1106 - AT
  71. 2015 (3) TMI 707 - AT
  72. 2014 (1) TMI 396 - AT
  73. 2013 (5) TMI 561 - AT
  74. 2013 (3) TMI 829 - AT
  75. 2012 (12) TMI 806 - AT
  76. 2012 (6) TMI 297 - AT
  77. 2012 (12) TMI 775 - AT
  78. 2011 (2) TMI 1583 - AT
  79. 2011 (1) TMI 1507 - AT
  80. 2010 (2) TMI 1186 - AT
  81. 2009 (9) TMI 637 - AT
  82. 2009 (1) TMI 297 - AT
  83. 2008 (12) TMI 437 - AT
  84. 2006 (10) TMI 255 - AT
  85. 2005 (8) TMI 701 - AT
  86. 2005 (1) TMI 742 - AT
  87. 2005 (1) TMI 309 - AT
  88. 2004 (12) TMI 625 - AT
  89. 2004 (5) TMI 239 - AT
  90. 2003 (11) TMI 281 - AT
  91. 2001 (10) TMI 291 - AT
  92. 2000 (7) TMI 971 - AT
  93. 2000 (5) TMI 156 - AT
  94. 1999 (1) TMI 55 - AT
  95. 1997 (5) TMI 67 - AT
  96. 1995 (8) TMI 99 - AT
  97. 1993 (12) TMI 80 - AT
  98. 1993 (2) TMI 131 - AT
  99. 1992 (12) TMI 79 - AT
  100. 1992 (7) TMI 112 - AT
  101. 1991 (12) TMI 102 - AT
Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of salaries paid to partners of a firm.
2. Characterization of income derived from tea estates.
3. Interpretation of sections 10(4)(b) and 16(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act.
4. Legal status of a partnership firm under the Indian Partnership Act.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Taxability of Salaries Paid to Partners of a Firm
The core controversy revolves around whether the salaries drawn by partners for services rendered to the firm are wholly liable to income-tax or only to the extent of 40%, which falls within the non-agricultural sector. Historically, until the assessment year ending March 31, 1959, income-tax assessments excluded 60% of the total income (including 60% of the salaries) as agricultural income. However, for the years 1959-60 and 1960-61, the entire salary was subjected to income-tax as income from other sources, following the precedent set by Mathew Abraham v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1964] 51 ITR 467 (Mad). The High Court, however, upheld the exclusionary argument of the assessees, leading to the revenue's appeal.

Issue 2: Characterization of Income Derived from Tea Estates
Income from tea sold, which is composite in character (largely agricultural and partly non-agricultural), is apportioned between the two heads for income-tax purposes under rule 24 of the Income-tax Rules. The judgment clarifies that 60% of the income from tea sales is agricultural and exempt from Central income-tax, while 40% is taxable as non-agricultural income. This apportionment applies equally to the salaries paid to partners, which are considered part of the profits and thus share the same invulnerability to tax as the agricultural portion of the profits.

Issue 3: Interpretation of Sections 10(4)(b) and 16(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act
Section 10(4)(b) stipulates that salaries paid to partners retain the character of profits and are not excludible from the tax net. Section 16(1)(b) further supports this by including salaries as part of the partner's share of the firm's income. The judgment emphasizes that salaries to partners are essentially a mode of profit distribution and should be treated as such for taxation purposes. This interpretation aligns with the statutory text and the principle that a partner cannot be his own employee, thus any remuneration is inherently a share of profits.

Issue 4: Legal Status of a Partnership Firm under the Indian Partnership Act
The judgment underscores that a firm is not a legal person but a collective noun representing an association of individuals. This view is consistent with the Indian Partnership Act and supported by precedents such as Dulichand Laxminarayan v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1956] 29 ITR 535 (SC). The firm's income is essentially the partners' income, and any salary paid to a partner is a distribution of profits rather than a separate employment income.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision, holding that salaries paid to partners are part of the profits and thus share the same tax treatment as the profits from which they are paid. The judgment clarifies that 60% of the income from tea sales, including the corresponding portion of salaries, is agricultural and exempt from Central income-tax. The interpretation of sections 10(4)(b) and 16(1)(b) supports this view, and the legal status of a partnership firm under Indian law reinforces that salaries to partners are not distinct from profit distribution. Appeals were dismissed, with both parties bearing their own costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates