HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Anglo-French Textile Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras
Civil Appeal No. 11 of 1952
[1954] SCR 523 ·
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922: sections 4(1)(a), 4A(c)(b), 42(1), 42(3), 66(1)
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
4-judge bench · Mehr Chand Mahajan J. · S. R. Das J. · Vivian Bose J. · N. H. Bhagwati J. (author)
Assessment years: 1942–43, 1943–44
01 · Facts of the case
The British-incorporated company manufactured textiles at Pondicherry and sold through Madras agents. For AYs 1942-43 and 1943-44 the authorities treated profits on British Indian sales as arising there, affecting the company-residence test. The record discusses differing receipt figures across the two years; the first reframed question proceeded on its stated finding of actual receipt. On 22 December 1952 the Supreme Court reframed the questions and sought the High Court’s opinion; this report also contains the final decision of 8 December 1953.
Source: Primary report: SCR 524–531
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Actual receipt and territorial accrual were separate inquiries. Receipt supporting section 4(1)(a) did not mean that all manufacturing and selling profits arose at the place of receipt. General apportionment principles, rather than section 42(3) itself, allocated the income relevant to section 4A(c)(b). Section 42(1) had no relevance to the first question’s assumed actual receipt charge. For the residence test, income had to be allocated among profit-producing operations within and outside the taxable territories; the Court expressly corrected the reference to section 42(3) in the second question.
03 · Judicial decision
The appeal was allowed with a mixed result: the first question answered against the company and the residence-allocation question in its favour. Each side bore its own appeal and remand costs.
Source: Primary report: SCR 536
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Mixed. The appeal was allowed with a mixed result: the first question answered against the company and the residence-allocation question in its favour. Each side bore its own appeal and remand costs.
Source: Primary report: SCR 536
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Do not confuse receipt-based liability with the actual geographical accrual used by the historical company residence test. This final 8 December 1953 decision includes its 22 December 1952 interlocutory reference order and is distinct from the same party’s SCR 448 and SCR 454 decisions.
Source: Primary report: SCR 530–536
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Fourteen-page report, SCR 523-536. The preceding Hardoi case fragment on SCR 523 is outside this note. Includes the 22 December 1952 reference order and the final 8 December 1953 judgment in Civil Appeal 11/1952.
Statutory scope
Historical statutory text and assessment period only. Present statutory equivalence and later judicial treatment are not cleared.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-19. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been comprehensively checked.
Page references identify the supplied PDF; paragraph references identify the judgment unless stated otherwise.
Related reviewed notes
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.