| Case ID |
230b85b8-4419-46c8-adc1-33b164e23330 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 370 of 1979 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 28, 1997 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of India affirmed the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Civil Appeal No. 370 of 1979, dated January 28, 1997. The case involved the Commissioner of Income Tax versus Soorajmaill Nagarmull. R.R. Mishra, Senior Advocate, along with B.Krishna Prasad, Advocate, represented the appellant, while J. Ramamurthy, Senior Advocate, served as Amicus curiae for the respondent. The court held that the interest derived by the assessee from moneys lent at interest and brought into Pakistan fell within the ambit of clause 5(f) of the Schedule to Article IV of the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation between India and Pakistan. Consequently, clause 9 of the Agreement was not applicable in this case. The High Court's decision was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed without any order as to costs. The court appreciated the assistance rendered by Shri Rama Murthy in the matter. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Commissioner of Income Tax versus Soorajmaill Nagarmull, Civil Appeal No. 370 of 1979, the Supreme Court of India delivered a pivotal decision on January 28, 1997. This case revolved around the interpretation of the Income Tax Act, 1922, specifically Section 66, and its application under the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation between India and Pakistan. The central issue pertained to the classification of income derived from money lent at interest and subsequently brought into Pakistan. The assessee, acting as the managing agent for two sugar mills in East Pakistan, had lent money to these managed companies. The key legal question was whether the interest income from these transactions fell under clause 5(f) of Article IV of the bilateral agreement, thereby qualifying for tax avoidance benefits. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal initially held that the interest income did fall within the ambit of clause 5(f), a decision upheld by the Calcutta High Court. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed this interpretation, ruling that clause 9, which serves as a residuary clause, was not applicable in this context. The Court emphasized that the funds were specifically diverted for the management and development of the companies in East Pakistan, thereby entitling the assessee to the benefits under clause 5(f). The legal representation was led by R.R. Mishra and B.Krishna Prasad for the appellant, with J. Ramamurthy acting as Amicus curiae for the respondent. The decision is significant for its clarification on the application of international tax agreements and the interpretation of income sources under double taxation avoidance treaties. This case not only reinforced the importance of precise clause interpretation in international agreements but also highlighted the role of judicial oversight in ensuring fair taxation practices across borders. Legal experts and tax professionals often cite this case when dealing with cross-border income taxation issues, making it a cornerstone in the field of international tax law. Additionally, the case underscores the intricate relationship between domestic tax laws and international agreements, providing a framework for resolving similar disputes in the future. The Supreme Court's judgment serves as a precedent for ensuring that income derived from specific business operations abroad is accurately classified and taxed accordingly, promoting transparency and fairness in international financial transactions. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of India
|
| Entities Involved |
Commissioner of Income Tax,
High Court,
Tribunal,
Income-tax Appellate Tribunal,
Appellate Assistant Commissioner,
Revenue,
Soorajmaill Nagarmull,
Calcutta High Court,
Amicus curiae
|
| Judges |
S.P. Bharucha,
N. Santosh Hegde,
Y.K. Sabharwal
|
| Lawyers |
R.R. Mishra,
B.Krishna Prasad,
J. Ramamurthy
|
| Petitioners |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Respondents |
Soorajmaill Nagarmull
|
| Citations |
2001 SLD 529,
2001 PTD 3380,
(2001) 249 ITR 749
|
| Other Citations |
(1981) 130 ITR 917
|
| Laws Involved |
Income Tax Act, 1922
|
| Sections |
66
|