Case Details

Citation(s)
1962 SLG 415 1962 SLD 415 (1962) 45 ITR 602
Madras High Court
CASE REFERRED No. 28 OF 1957, APRIL 20, 1961
RAJAGOPALAN AND SRINIVASAN, JJ.
T.V. Balakrishnan for the Applicant. S. Ranganathan for the
Respondent

Southern Agencies Ltd.

v.

Commissioner of Income tax

Law:

Section:

I. Section 36(1)(vii), read with section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [Corresponding to section 10(2)(xi), read with section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922] - Bad debts - Assessment year 1948-49 to 1950-51 - Assessee-company had one of its as objects promotion of new companies and obtaining managing agency of companies so promoted - During relevant accounting year assessee incurred certain expenditure to promote a cement company which was eventually never formed - Assessee claimed expenditure incurred as an allowable deduction either under section 10(2)(xi) of 1922 Act or under section10(2)(xv) of 1922 Act - Whether there was no scope for invoking section 10(2)(xi) of 1922 Act as neither when moneys were expended nor at any time thereafter was there a contract between assessee company and any other person that assessee should get back money; and, hence, no debtor came into existence with a liability to pay debt -Held, yes - Whether where there was no proof that alleged waiver of expenditure incurred by assessee in connection with promotion of textile will was for adequate business consideration, and that said debt was irrecoverable, assessee was not entitled to claim deduction of said expenditure - Held, yes - Whether if a claim properly arising under section 10(2)(xi) of 1922 Act could not be upheld under that sub-section, it could not be brought again under section 10(2)(xv) of 1922 Act - Held, yes FACTS-I The assessee company had as one of its objects promotion of new companies and obtaining the managing agency of the companies so promoted. The claim of the assessee was that it incurred preliminary expenditure to promote a cement company and in the three years of account in question expended large sums to explore possibilities for successfully launching that contemplated cement company. Eventually the cement company was never formed. The moneys had been spent by the assessee. The assessee claimed these sums as lawful admissible deductions either under section 10(2)(xi) or under section 10(2)(xv) in computing its profits in the relevant assessment years. The assessee also claimed a sum being the outlay incurred by the assessee in connection…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492