HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Lakshmichand Baijnath v. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal
Civil Appeals Nos. 271–272 of 1955
[1959] Supp. 1 SCR 415 ·
Income-tax Act 1922 sections 23, 25A and 66 · Excess Profits Tax Act
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
3-judge bench · T. L. Venkatarama Aiyar · P. B. Gajendragadkar · A. K. Sarkar
Assessment years: 1946-47
01 · Facts of the case
A Hindu undivided family claimed business-book credits were proceeds of ancestral jewellery sold on partition. Its partition was recognized under section 25A, but assessing authorities rejected the jewellery explanation and treated the credits as concealed profits.
Source: Primary report: SCR 416–420
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Section 25A concerned partition and division into definite portions, not determination of taxable income under section 23. The disputed proceedings book had not been relied on as evidence of the receipts before the original authorities; refusal to admit it on appeal was not perverse.
Source: Primary report: SCR 421–424
03 · Judicial decision
The partition order did not conclusively establish the claimed source of credits. On the evidentiary record the inference that unexplained business-book credits were assessable receipts was sustainable.
Source: Primary report: SCR 424–425
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Both taxpayer appeals were dismissed with costs.
Source: Primary report: SCR 425
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
The separate excess-profits-tax argument was not pursued further because it was outside the referred questions. The Court observed that a business-receipt inference from business-book credits was not unreasonable; it did not lay down automatic taxation of every unexplained amount irrespective of evidence.
Source: Primary report: SCR 425
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 11-page Supreme Court Reports scan. Any adjoining report fragments remain in the unchanged original and are excluded from this analysis.
Statutory scope
Historical legislation expressly identified in this note. This is not a decision under the Income-tax Act, 1961 or the Income-tax Act, 2025. Verify enacted wording, commencement, transition and subsequent judicial treatment independently before modern reliance.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-23. 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.
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note uses AI assistance and a preserved full-primary review, with refreshed exact original-byte verification. 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. AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding.