Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amount refunded by the Government to the assessee by adjustment, being a portion of excise kist earlier allowed as revenue expenditure, was taxable under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.
Analysis: The amount originally paid as excise kist had been deducted as revenue expenditure in earlier assessment years. The refund was not a mere remission of liability but an actual refund received by adjustment and credited in the assessee's accounts on the cash-credit basis. The authorities considered the distinction between receipts arising from recoupment of business outgoings and cases involving only remission of debt. Decisions dealing with actual or constructive business receipts supported taxation, while cases relating only to remission under a mercantile system were distinguishable. The later insertion of section 10(2A) was treated as covering the field of refunds and remissions and as declaratory or introduced out of abundant caution, rather than creating a new principle for such refunds.
Conclusion: The refund was a taxable trading receipt and not a casual receipt; the question was answered in the affirmative and against the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: A refund of an amount previously claimed and allowed as business expenditure is taxable as a trading receipt when it is actually received or credited, and the later statutory provision covering refunds and remissions is declaratory of that position.