HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
India United Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax, Bombay
Civil Appeal 160 of 1953
[1955] 1 SCR 810 ·
Excess Profits Tax Act 1940, sections 15, 26(3)
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
5-judge bench · Mehr Chand Mahajan C.J. · S. R. Das · Ghulam Hasan · Bhagwati · Venkatarama Ayyar
Assessment years: Chargeable accounting periods 1941, 1942 and 1943
01 · Facts of the case
The company received special wartime allowances on its representation that additional buildings, plant and machinery would not be required after hostilities. Revenue later found those assets remained in business use after the war and reopened the assessments.
Source: Primary report: SCR 811–814
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Section 15 required escaped or underassessed profits or excessive relief discovered through definite information. Its discovery power included subsequent facts materially bearing on a relief expressly dependent on future circumstances. The section supplied machinery to implement section 26(3); the proviso permitting conditions did not displace that jurisdiction.
Source: Primary report: SCR 815–821
03 · Judicial decision
Reassessments were valid. The assessee’s appeal was dismissed with costs.
Source: Primary report: SCR 821–822
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue succeeded.
Source: Primary report: SCR 821–822
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Distinguish a future-dependent allowance disproved by later use from a correct contemporaneous estimate merely reconsidered later. The Court expressly declined a final ruling on corresponding Income-tax Act reassessment provisions.
Source: Primary report: SCR 819–822
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 13-page primary report, including any adjoining report boundary fragments retained in the exact source bytes.
Statutory scope
Historical predecessor legislation only; this is not a decision applying the Income-tax Act, 1961. Verify the applicable statutory text separately.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-21. 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.
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.