{"id":193400,"date":"1965-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1965-10-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965"},"modified":"2016-10-16T12:03:10","modified_gmt":"2016-10-16T06:33:10","slug":"chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","title":{"rendered":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Sikri<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: P.B. Gajendragadkar(Cj), K.N. Wanchoo, M. Hidayatullah, J.C. Shah, S.M.<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  563 of 1964\n\nPETITIONER:\nChittoor Motor Transport Company Private Limited\n\nRESPONDENT:\nIncome Tax Officer, Chittoor\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/10\/1965\n\nBENCH:\nP.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR(CJ) &amp; K.N. WANCHOO &amp; M. HIDAYATULLAH &amp; J.C. SHAH &amp; S.M.\nSIKRI\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>1966 AIR (SC) 570<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment was delivered by SIKRI J.\n<\/p>\n<p>SIKRI J.\n<\/p>\n<p>This is an appeal by certificate of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh<br \/>\nagainst its judgment dismissing a petition filed under article 226 of the<br \/>\nConstitution by the appellant. The appellant is a private limited company,<br \/>\nhereinafter referred to as &#8220;the company&#8221;, and three persons hold shares of<br \/>\nthe company as under Shares Amount<\/p>\n<p>Rs<\/p>\n<p>Sri C. P. Sarathy Mudaliar 2, 797 27, 970<\/p>\n<p>Sri C. P. Singaram 420 4, 200<\/p>\n<p>Sri C. P. Doraiswamy 500 5, 000<\/p>\n<p>The company was doing transport business and for the assessment year<br \/>\n1959-60 (previous year ending 31st March, 1959) it claimed a sum of Rs. 48,<br \/>\n600 as development rebate in respect of the four new buses purchased by it<br \/>\nand brought to use during the year. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the<br \/>\namount but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal, allowed the<br \/>\nentire sum of Rs. 48, 600 as development rebate. On May 27, 1959, the three<br \/>\nshareholders entered into a partnership and the capital of the firm was as<br \/>\nfollows<\/p>\n<p>Rs<\/p>\n<p>C. P. Sarathy Mudaliar 25, 000<\/p>\n<p>C. P. Singaram 10, 000<\/p>\n<p>C. P. Doraiswamy 10, 000<\/p>\n<p>Total 45, 000<\/p>\n<p>On June 30, 1959, the company passed a resolution transferring a number of<br \/>\nmotor buses, including the four in respect of which development rebate had<br \/>\nbeen claimed, to the partnership firm for a sum of Rs. 2, 52, 000. The<br \/>\ncompany was not wound up and is still in existence and carrying on business<br \/>\nas a transport company. On February 7, 1962, the Income-tax Officer,<br \/>\npurporting to Act under section 35(11) of the Income-tax Act, 1922,<br \/>\nhereinafter referred to as the Act, issued a memorandum to the appellant<br \/>\nstating, inter alia, that<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;since the assets were transferred within 10 years I propose to invoke the<br \/>\nprovisions of section 35 of the Act and rectify the income by including the<br \/>\nrebate allowed as income of the assessee.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>He invited the assessee to give his objections, if any. The appellant<br \/>\nthereupon filed a petition in the High Court on February 19, 1962, praying<br \/>\ninter alia that the Income-tax Officer be prohibited from proceeding with<br \/>\nthe rectification of the income-tax assessment for 1959-60, as per the<br \/>\nmemorandum dated February 7, 1962. Two points were taken in the petition :<br \/>\nFirst, that section 10(2)(vib) of the Income-tax Act was repugnant to<br \/>\narticle 14 of the Constitution; and, secondly, that assuming that section<br \/>\n10(2) (vib) was intra vires, this transaction did not amount to a sale or<br \/>\ntransferThe High Court held that section 10(2)(vib) was not repugnant to<br \/>\narticle 14 of the Constitution, and that the transaction amounted to<br \/>\ntransfer within section 10(2)(vib)<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Naunit Lal, has reiterated the<br \/>\nsame points before us. Section 10(2)(vib) and section 35(11) are in the<br \/>\nfollowing terms<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;10(2) Such profits or gains shall be computed after making the following<br \/>\nallowances, namely :&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>(vib) in respect of a new ship acquired or new machinery or plant installed<br \/>\nafter the 31st day of March, 1954, which is wholly used for the purposes of<br \/>\nthe business carried on by the assessee, a sum by way of development rebate<br \/>\nin respect of the year of acquisition of the ship or of the installation of<br \/>\nthe machinery or plant, equivalent to, &#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) in the case of a ship acquired before the 1st day of January, 1958,<br \/>\nand in the case of any machinery or plant, twenty-five per cent of the<br \/>\nactual cost of the ship or machinery or plant to the assessee<\/p>\n<p>and if any such ship, machinery or plant is sold or otherwise transferred<br \/>\nby the assessee to any person other than the Government at any time before<br \/>\nthe expiry of ten years from the end of the year in which it was acquired<br \/>\nor installed, any allowance made under this clause shall be deemed to have<br \/>\nbeen wrongly allowed for the purposes of this Act.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8221; 35.(11) Where an allowance by way of development rebate has been made<br \/>\nwholly or partly to an assessee in respect of a ship, machinery or plant in<br \/>\nany year of assessment under clause (vib) of sub-section (2) of section 10,<br \/>\nand subsequently at any time before the expiry of ten years from the end of<br \/>\nthe year in which the ship was acquired or the machinery or plant was<br \/>\ninstalled&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) the ship, machinery or plant is sold or otherwise transferred by the<br \/>\nassessee to any person other than the Government ; orthe development rebate<br \/>\noriginally allowed shall be deemed to have been wrongly allowed, and the<br \/>\nIncome-tax Officer may, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,<br \/>\nproceed to re-compute the total income of the assessee for the relevant<br \/>\nyear as if the re-computation is a rectification of a mistake apparent from<br \/>\nthe record within the meaning of this section, and the provisions of sub-<br \/>\nsection (1) shall apply accordingly, the period of four years specified<br \/>\ntherein being reckoned from the end of the year in which the transfer takes<br \/>\nplace or the money is so utilised.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that on the true interpretation of section 10(2)(vib) it<br \/>\nis clear that if an assessee sells to a person other than the Government at<br \/>\nany time before the expiry of ten years from the end of the year in which<br \/>\nthe motor vehicle was acquired, the allowance is deemed to have been<br \/>\nwrongly allowed for the purposes of the Act, but if the assessee sells it<br \/>\nto the Government, no such consequence follows<\/p>\n<p>The learned Additional Solicitor-General says that the object was to help<br \/>\nin the development of industry; indeed the rebate was called &#8220;development<br \/>\nrebate&#8221;; and in order to achieve this object a condition was put that if<br \/>\nthe assessee did not utilise it in his own business, the rebate would be<br \/>\nforfeited or deemed to have been allowed wrongly, i.e., not really for<br \/>\ndevelopment purposes. He said that by a sale to the Government this object<br \/>\nwas not defeated because the legislature assumes that the Government will<br \/>\nact in the public interest. In our opinion, there is no discrimination<br \/>\nwhich is hit by article 14 of the Constitution in this case. The<br \/>\nlegislature has directed the giving of a rebate on conditions which are<br \/>\nexactly the same for every assessee, one condition being that if the<br \/>\nassessee sells before the expiry of ten years from the end of the year in<br \/>\nwhich it was acquired, to a person other than the Government, he would<br \/>\nforfeit such rebate. This condition is applicable to every assessee and an<br \/>\nassessee has a choice of either selling to a person other than the<br \/>\nGovernment and forfeiting the rebate or selling to the Government and<br \/>\nkeeping the rebate with himself. The discrimination, if any, arises on the<br \/>\nchoice made by the assessee. The legislature perhaps presumes that if the<br \/>\nmachinery is offered to the Government for sale, the Government will only<br \/>\nbuy it at a price which will take into consideration the rebate taken by<br \/>\nthe assessee. In our opinion, therefore, it has not been established that<br \/>\nsection 10(2)(vib) violates article 14 of the ConstitutionMr. Naunit Lal<br \/>\nthen urges that in this case there has been no sale or transfer within<br \/>\nsection 10(2)(vib). He says that the company consisted of the same three<br \/>\npersons as the partnership firm. He further says that it is not a<br \/>\ncommercial transaction at all and what the latter part of section 10(2)<br \/>\n(vib) contemplates is a commercial sale or transfer. In this connection he<br \/>\nrelies on Commissioner of Income-tax v. Sir Homi Mehta&#8217;s Executors, Rogers<br \/>\n&amp; Co. v. <a href=\"\/doc\/722169\/\">Commissioner of Income-tax and Commissioner of Income-tax v.<br \/>\nMugneeram Bangur<\/a> . In the first case the facts in brief were these. The<br \/>\nassessee and his sons formed a private limited company and transferred to<br \/>\nthat company shares in several joint stock companies which the assessee had<br \/>\nheld jointly with his sons for Rs. 40, 97, 000 which was the market value<br \/>\nof the shares at that time. It was found that these shares had cost to the<br \/>\nassessee only Rs. 30, 45, 017 and the income-tax authorities levied income-<br \/>\ntax on the difference between the market price and the cost price of the<br \/>\nshares on the ground that the assessee had made a profit to that extent by<br \/>\nthis transaction. The High Court held that though the assessee and his sons<br \/>\non the one hand and the private limited company formed by them were<br \/>\ndistinct entities in law but in truth and substance the only result of this<br \/>\nparticular transaction was that Sir Homi Mehta and his sons held these very<br \/>\nshares in a different way from the way they held before the transaction. It<br \/>\nobserved that &#8221; they adopted a different mode, the mode of the formation of<br \/>\nthe limited company with all its advantages, in order to hold these shares<br \/>\nand to deal with these shares and to make profit out of these shares. It<br \/>\nfurther held that Sir Homi Mehta did not deal with these shares in the<br \/>\nordinary course as a businessman when he transferred these shares to the<br \/>\nprivate limited company. In our opinion, this case has no relevance to the<br \/>\nquestion of the interpretation of the words &#8220;sold or otherwise transferred&#8221;<br \/>\nin the latter part of section 10(2)(vib)The second case, Rogers &amp; Co. v.<br \/>\nCommissioner of Income-tax , is on the same lines. The Calcutta High Court<br \/>\nin <a href=\"\/doc\/722169\/\">Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mugneeram Bangur<\/a> followed Doughty&#8217;s case,<br \/>\nbut there too they were not concerned with the interpretation of the words<br \/>\n&#8220;sold or otherwise transferred&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>If we look at the resolution dated June 30, 1959, it is quite clear that it<br \/>\nis a sale for consideration of a number of buses by the limited company to<br \/>\nthe partnership. It would be a sale under the Sale of Goods Act and it<br \/>\nwould be a sale in any other proper meaning which might be given to the<br \/>\nword &#8220;sale&#8221;. We are not concerned whether any profit resulted to the<br \/>\nassessee but what we are concerned with is whether the assessee had sold or<br \/>\ntransferred these buses to the partnership. To us the answer seems to be<br \/>\nplain that whether the transaction resulted in profit to the company or<br \/>\nnot, the transaction comes within the purview of the latter part of section<br \/>\n10(2)(vib)<\/p>\n<p>In the result the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 Author: Sikri Bench: P.B. Gajendragadkar(Cj), K.N. Wanchoo, M. Hidayatullah, J.C. Shah, S.M. CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 563 of 1964 PETITIONER: Chittoor Motor Transport Company Private Limited RESPONDENT: Income Tax Officer, Chittoor DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/10\/1965 BENCH: P.B. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-193400","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965\",\"datePublished\":\"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\"},\"wordCount\":1717,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\",\"name\":\"Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965","datePublished":"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965"},"wordCount":1717,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965","name":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company ... vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1965-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-16T06:33:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chittoor-motor-transport-company-vs-income-tax-officer-chittoor-on-6-october-1965#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chittoor Motor Transport Company &#8230; vs Income Tax Officer, Chittoor on 6 October, 1965"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/193400","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=193400"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/193400\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=193400"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=193400"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=193400"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}