LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback Law Cite

Their Lordships ' view, therefore, was him through or from any business connex th»t it is the source of the income which ion or property in British India is to be has to be considered, and not the place deemed to be idpome accruing or arising where it is received. within British India. The effect of S. This case was referred to In re Au 18 (2A), which inserted by Act 16 of rangabad Mills, Ltd. (4), a decision un 1925, is to render Subject to income-tax der S. 3 (1) of the Act of 1918. It was any income chargeable under the head there held that the profits of a company ` salaries " which is payable to the asses which are made from manufacture carried see out of India by or on behalf of Gov on beyond British India cannot be said ernment. These sections do not appear to accrue or arise in British India on ac to be of assistance in the general con count of head office being in Bombay, struction of the words " accruing " and where also the directors control the " arising " in S. 4 (l). They seem to be business. Macleod, C. J., (at pages 1290 designed to bring within the ambit of and 1291) after quoting the above cited the tax special classes of cases which would passage from the judgment of their Lord otherwise escape. I am unable to appre ships remarked that the doubt which ciate the argument to be found in the might have arisen in Commissioners of reference and which is based on the posi Taxation v. Kirk (3) whether the profits tion of a salary earner. It is said that were not derived at a place where the in his case the salary accrues and arises third and fourth processes were carried in the place where he does the work, out, did not arise in the case before him which is in British India, and that it because all the four processes were carried therefore accrues in British India and is out in Hyderabad. This case was follow taxable. But this argument overlooks ed in Board of Revenue v. Ripon Press, the fact that the Commissioner has ex {5). In Commissioner of Income-tax, pressly held that the remuneration of the Burma v. Steel Bros. & Co. Ltd. (6), it assessee is not " salary " and has classi was held, applying the principles laid fied it under " other sources." down in Commissioners of Taxation v. If the correct principle be that the Kirk (3), that in determining whether words accrue and arise when applied to .any income, profits or gains arise or income are to be governed by the source accrue from which the income accrues and arises, " we must not be content to look at the last atage of the accrual, but must take into consi it would appear that in the case referred deration the previous stages as well." that source is to be found in Bangkok The company was non-resident in rather than in Moulmein. The assessed British India, but at mills situate in is a Forest Officer in the service of the Burma it worked up commodities and Siamese Government. It is not stated raw materials into forms suitable for use that his remuneration is in the nature of and shipped them to the United Kingdom a commission on the amount of revenue where they were sold. It was held that collected- On the contrary it is said to the profits or gains accruing to the com- be 600 ticals per mensem. The inference (4)     1

Cases Referring to this Case

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court	Jurisdiction	Date	Full Text		Citation Index †
Commissioner of Income-tax v v Phra Phraison Salarak	[1928] AllINRprRang 87	All India Reporter - Rangoon	Myanmar	20 Jun 1928	AsianLII