TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Association of limited companies excluded from 'other association of individuals' under Section 3 Income-tax Act 1922</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMBAY PRESIDIENCY Versus AHMEDABAD MILLOWNERS' ASSOCIATION</h3> The Bombay HC held that an association of limited companies does not fall within the scope of 'other association of individuals' under Section 3 of the ... Interpretation of Section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, XI of 1922 regarding the tax liability of an association of limited companies and individuals - Word 'individual' - HELD THAT:- The phrase in Section 3 is: 'Income, profits and gains of every individual, Hindu undivided family, company, firm or other association of individuals'. The same words appear in various places in the Act, including Sections 55 and 56 under which super-tax is charged, although in those sections the disjunctive 'or' is used before 'other association of individuals' instead of the copulative 'and'. The question is whether 'other association of individuals' includes an association of companies. It seems to me quite clear on the context that it cannot do so. 'Individual' where first used, must mean human-being, because it is used as something distinct from a joint family, firm and company. The whole expression seems to me to mean 'every human-being, Hindu undivided family, company, firm and other association of human-beings'. One cannot give to the word 'individuals' in the expression 'association of individuals' a different meaning to that which the word 'individual' bears where it appears in the same phrase. In my opinion, therefore, the answer to the question raised by the learned Commissioner must be in the negative. The assessee to get costs, to be paid by the Commissioner, on the original side scale. B.J. WADIA, J.--I agree. Reference answered. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED:- Whether the Association constituted as mentioned, with members being limited companies and an individual, should be treated as an 'association of individuals' for income tax purposes under Section 3 of the Income-tax Act.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS:Relevant legal framework and precedents:- The Income-tax Act defines taxable entities as individuals, Hindu undivided families, companies, firms, or other associations of individuals.- Precedents from Lahore and Allahabad High Courts establish that a firm is not a separate entity but a collective name for individual members.- The dictionary meaning of 'individual' includes an indivisible entity, which the Commissioner interprets to include limited companies.Court's interpretation and reasoning:- The Court analyzes the context of the term 'individual' in the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the distinction between human beings, joint families, firms, and companies.- The Court concludes that 'individuals' in the phrase 'association of individuals' refers to human beings, excluding companies or other non-human entities.Key evidence and findings:- The Association consisted of 60 limited companies and one individual during the assessment year.- The Commissioner's opinion was based on the dictionary definition of 'individual' and the composition of the Association.Application of law to facts:- The Court applies the statutory language and contextual interpretation to determine the taxability of the Association.- It clarifies that 'individual' in the Act refers to human beings, not corporate entities like limited companies.Treatment of competing arguments:- The Commissioner argued that a company could be considered an 'individual' based on the dictionary definition and the Association's membership structure.- The Court disagrees, emphasizing the legislative intent and the distinction between human beings and corporate entities in the Act.Conclusions:- The Court answers the question in the negative, ruling that the Association should not be treated as an 'association of individuals' for income tax purposes.- The Court orders the Commissioner to bear the costs of the assessee on the original side scale.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS:- The Court's decision clarifies that 'individuals' in the Income-tax Act refer to human beings, excluding corporate entities like limited companies from the definition.- The ruling establishes the principle that the context and legislative intent must guide the interpretation of statutory language, ensuring consistency and clarity in tax assessments.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
