HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal v. Calcutta Stock Exchange Association Ltd.
Civil Appeal No. 204 of 1958
[1959] Supp. (2) SCR 459 ·
Indian Income-tax Act, 1922: section 10(6)
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
3-judge bench · B. P. Sinha · J. L. Kapur · M. Hidayatullah
Assessment years: 1945-46
01 · Facts of the case
The exchange received admission fees of Rs.60,750 and subscriptions of Rs.15,687 from members for authorised assistants, and Rs.16,000 for quotation-list admissions. The High Court held these outside section 10(6), reversing the Tribunal. Assistants were not members; payments were made by members.
Source: Primary report: SCR 461–467
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Specific services included tangible additional benefits made available for a separately related payment, not merely labour remunerated as wages. Authorised-assistant arrangements and listing facilities were distinct services paid for by interested members. Services need not fall outside the association’s objects; triviality of effort did not defeat the nexus.
Source: Primary report: SCR 467–475
03 · Judicial decision
All three disputed receipts fell within the section 10(6) business deeming provision and were assessable. The reference should have been answered affirmatively.
Source: Primary report: SCR 470–475
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue’s appeal was allowed with costs in the Court and below.
Source: Primary report: SCR 475
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Analyse each fee against the specific benefit and payment nexus rather than assuming every member receipt is mutual. This decision applies the express historical business deeming provision, not a universal denial of mutuality to associations.
Source: Primary report: SCR 467–471
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
Complete 17-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.