Judicial Approach to the Concept of Income with Special Reference to the Raja Bahadur Kamakshya Narain Singh of Ramagarh versus Commissioner of Income Tax
Keywords:
Income, Income Tax, Income Tax Act, royalties, rent, mining leases, capital, capital paymentAbstract
Sections 2(14), 4(1) and 14 of Income Tax Act, 1961 defined the expression “Income” but the said provision failed to provide a restricted and precise interpretation of “Income” which was very well raised in “Kamakshya Narain Singh of Ramagarh versus Commissioner of Income Tax [(1943) II ITR 513 (PC)]” which tried to approach for exploring judicial concept of the expression “Income”. “Kamakshya Narain Singh of Ramagarh versus Commissioner of Income Tax [(1943) II ITR 513 (PC)]” held that a reference to the analogy of fruit or increase or sowing or reaping or periodical harvests cannot be used to limit the true character of income in general. Through this case study, we tried to explore the true interpretation of the expession “Income” as used in the Act.
References
1. The Privy Council. Raja Bahadur Kamakshya Narain Singh of Ramgarh v. Commissioner of Income-tax. Lord Russell of Killowen, Lord Wright, Lord Porter, Sir George Rankin and Sir Madhavan Nair. Privy Council Appeal No. 21 of 1942. The Privy Council. [online]. Available at: https://www.taxsutra.com/sites/taxsutra.com/files/webform/TS-1-SC-1943-Raja%20Bahadur% 20.pdf
2. Chaturvedi, Pithisaria. Supreme Court on Income Tax Digest, Volume-I (1922-2015). New Delhi: Lexis Nexis; 2015. Pages 842, 889, 900, 919, 926, 128, 1285.
3. Roopashi Khatri. Role of The Judiciary in Indian Tax Policy: An Evaluation of the Efficiency of Judicial Outcome. NUJS L. Rev. 2019;12(2).
4. Government of India. Income Tax Act, 1961, Bare Act. Professional Publication; 2020.
