HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Commissioner of Income-tax/Excess Profits Tax, Bombay City v. Bhogilal Laherchand including Batliboi & Co.
Civil Appeal No. 160 of 1950 (as printed and listed by the Registry)
[1954] 1 SCR 444; 1953 INSC 94 ·
Indian Income-tax Act 1922: sections 42(1), 42(3), 4 and 14(c)
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
4-judge bench · Mehr Chand Mahajan J. · S.R. Das J. · Ghulam Hasan J. · Jagannadhadas J.
Assessment years: 1943-44
01 · Facts of the case
An assessee traded through Bombay, Madras and Mysore establishments. Revenue attributed part of the Mysore trading profits to operations in British India. The Tribunal and High Court treated section 42 as restricted to non-residents.
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
The 1939 amendment removed the restriction to non-residents. The language of sections 4, 14(c) and 42 showed that subsections 42(1) and 42(3) covered residents too. The obsolete marginal note could not restrict the statutory language. The historical territorial and exemption provisions had to be read together.
03 · Judicial decision
Revenue's appeal was allowed with costs. The first referred question was answered in the affirmative.
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue, on the disputed applicability of section 42 to resident assessees. The appeal did not independently redetermine the underlying profit estimates.
Source: Primary report: SCR 445-446 and 453-454; PDF 2-3 and 10-11
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Identify the applicable statutory version, territorial operations and scope of the reference before using this historical ruling in a modern matter. Do not rely on the unresolved monetary figures or infer that the Court independently recomputed the attributed profits. Keep the documentary chronology qualification with any citation to the printed docket.
Source: Primary report: Editorial analysis anchored in SCR 445-454; not an additional holding
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 11-page report segment, SCR 444-454. Adjoining case fragments are retained in the unchanged original and excluded from this analysis.
- Judgment identity is corroborated by the official Registry neutral-citation list, Annexure A, row 282: matching parties, decision date, SCR pages, docket and 1953 INSC 94. This corroborates identity; it does not correct the documentary chronology.
Statutory scope
The decision applies the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and its historical territorial and State-integration setting. It is not a ruling under the Income-tax Act, 1961 or 2025; modern equivalence and applicability require independent verification.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-26. Subsequent treatment and present-law applicability have not been comprehensively checked.
Page references identify the supplied PDF; paragraph references identify the judgment unless stated otherwise.
Identified source links
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
AI-assisted research checked against the complete identified primary report. Independent human approval is not represented. Documentary source exceptions are expressly disclosed.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete original, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not an additional holding of the Court.