https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49558 Additional income-tax under paragraph B of Part I of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1951, could not be levied where a company had no positive total income and the assessment resulted in a loss. The charging liability arose under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, while the Finance Act only fixed rates; the proviso to paragraph B assumed the existence of income and profits capable of taxation. Those words could not be rewritten or extended by implication, and the excess-dividend fiction operated only within its limited computational purpose. The Supreme Court held that the proviso was not an independent charging provision, so the levy failed against the Revenue. en-us Wed, 04 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Oct 2014 16:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49558 Additional income-tax under paragraph B of Part I of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1951, could not be levied where a company had no positive total income and the assessment resulted in a loss. The charging liability arose under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, while the Finance Act only fixed rates; the proviso to paragraph B assumed the existence of income and profits capable of taxation. Those words could not be rewritten or extended by implication, and the excess-dividend fiction operated only within its limited computational purpose. The Supreme Court held that the proviso was not an independent charging provision, so the levy failed against the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49558