COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. G. NARSHIMHAN (DIED) BY HEIRS

CIVIL APPEAL No. 6799/1983Supreme Court1998 INSC 47914 December 1998Bench: 2 JudgesAuthor: SUJATA V. MANOHAR, AJAY PRAKASH MISRA COMMISSIONER OF9 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee was a shareholder in a private limited company, M/s Kasthuri Estates (Pvt.) Ltd. For the accounting year relevant to AY 1963-64, the company reduced its share capital from Rs. 1,000 per share to Rs. 210 per share. This reduction resulted in a pro-rata distribution of company properties and money to shareholders, including the assessee. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that no capital gains accrued to the assessee. The Revenue requested the Tribunal to refer two questions to the High Court. The High Court ruled in favour of the assessee. The Revenue then filed an appeal before the Supreme Court.

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal. Regarding the first issue, the Court held that when a loan by a company to a shareholder, as set out in Section 2(22)(e), is treated as a deemed dividend, it must be treated as a payment out of accumulated profits. This legal fiction must be carried to its logical conclusion, meaning the payment should be considered a dividend for all purposes and adjusted against the company's accumulated profits to the extent it is deemed a dividend. For the second issue, the Court held that any distribution made by a company on reduction of its share capital, which can be correlated with the company's accumulated profits (whether capitalised or not), is to be treated as a dividend in the hands of the assessee. Only the balance amount, if any, exceeding accumulated profits, would constitute a capital receipt. Capital gains would arise only if this capital receipt exceeds the original cost of acquisition of the extinguished portion of the share. The Court noted that the assessee received both cash and property, and the portion attributable to accumulated profits would be deleted, with the balance subject to capital gains tax after considering the cost of acquisition. The Tribunal was directed to determine the valuation of the property and the resulting capital gains.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in directing that a sum of Rs. 64,517, being deemed dividends assessed in the hands of shareholders in past years, should be deducted from the surplus while determining the 'accumulated profits' in the hands of the company, under Section 2(22)(e) and Section 194 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contention: The amounts advanced by the company to its shareholders and assessed as dividends should be deducted from the surplus for determining 'accumulated profits'. Revenue's contention: The amounts should not be deducted from the surplus for determining 'accumulated profits'. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that no capital gain was assessable in the hands of the assessee as there was no extinguishment of any right and consequently no transfer within the meaning of Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1963-64, under Sections 45(1), 2(47), and 2(22)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contention: No capital gains accrued as there was no extinguishment of right or transfer. Revenue's contention: Capital gains are assessable as there was an extinguishment of right and thus a transfer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(22)(e),Section 194,Section 205,Section 45(1),Section 2(47),Section 2(22)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

A COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. G. NARSHIMHAN (DIED) BY HEIRS DECEMBER 14, 1998 B [SUJA TA V. MANOHAR AND A.P. MISRA, JI.] Income Tax Act, 1961: Sections 2(22)(e) and 194-Dividend-Deemed dividend-Treatment C of in computing accumulated profits of the company-Private limited company reducing its share capital-Pro rata distribution of some properties of the company and payment of money to its shareholders-Treated by the shareholders as deemed dividend and taxed accordingly in relevant accounting year-Held, the amounts have to be treated as dividend for all D purpose and would reduce the accumulated profits (whether capitalised or not ) and be considered as ac/justed against the accumulated profits to the extent it is treated a deemed dividend-Income Tax-Accumulated profits- Quantification of-Companies Act, 1961, Section 205. Sections 45(1), 2(47) & 2(22) (d) & (e)-Dividends-Capital receipts- E Amounts received by shareholders on reduction of company's capital-If constitute capital gains-For reduction of company's value the shareholders received cash as well as property-Held, portion of the total amount so received including the value of the property to the extent

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 2(22)(e)

All 1,734 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(22)(e) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →