Supreme Court: Imminent Death Not Required For a Statement to Qualify as Dying Declaration  ||  SC: HC Cannot Grant Pre-Arrest Bail Without Quashing FIR; Accused Must Approach Sessions Court First  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: Agreed Interest Rate Cannot Be Challenged as Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Override Contract  ||  SC: GST Exemption on Residential Lease Applies When Building is Sub-Leased for Hostel/PG Use  ||  Rajasthan High Court: Universities Cannot Retain Students’ Original Documents for Pending Fees  ||  NCLT: Damages from Contractual Disputes Cannot Form Basis for Initiating Insolvency Proceedings  ||  Del HC: Pre-SCN Consultation is Unnecessary in Large-Scale GST Fraud Cases with Complex Transactions  ||  Calcutta HC: Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Violates Natural Justice and Sets Aside the Award  ||  Raj HC Upholds Padmesh Mishra’s AAG Appointment, Noting Advocacy Skill isn’t Tied to Experience    

Navinchandra Mafatlal v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City - (Supreme Court) (01 Nov 1954)

Giving a constitutional enactment the widest possible meaning

MANU/SC/0070/1954

Direct Taxation

It seems prerequisite that any case seeking to send aftershocks into the legal system should have the word Mafatlal in it. Certainly, Mr. Mafatlal here may not quite comprise the elite constitutional club of his eponymous brethren, but its amplitude is no less wide. Considering if capital gain could be construed as income, the Court concluded that income in “its natural meaning embraces any profit or gain which is actually received”. In its obiter the Court provided much interpretational fodder and freedom to courts in the future; it noted, “words [in a constitutional enactment] should be read in their ordinary, natural and grammatical meaning… the most liberal construction should be upon the words”.

Relevant : Wallace Brothers and Co. Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax MANU/PR/0011/1948 United Provinces vs. Mt. Atiqa Begum and Ors. MANU/FE/0003/1940 The State of Bombay and Anr. vs. F.N. Balsara MANU/SC/0009/1951

Tags : INCOME   CONSTITUTION   INTERPRETATION   WIDEST   NATURAL MEANING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved