{"id":80890,"date":"1961-12-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1961-12-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961"},"modified":"2016-07-19T18:00:57","modified_gmt":"2016-07-19T12:30:57","slug":"gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","title":{"rendered":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 1361, \t\t 1962 SCR Supl. (2) 211<\/div>\n
Author: K L.<\/div>\n
Bench: Sinha, Bhuvneshwar P.(Cj), Kapur, J.L., Hidayatullah, M., Shah, J.C., Mudholkar, J.R.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nGORDON WOODROFFEE LEATHER MANUFACTURING CO.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n20\/12\/1961\n\nBENCH:\nKAPUR, J.L.\nBENCH:\nKAPUR, J.L.\nSINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ)\nHIDAYATULLAH, M.\nSHAH, J.C.\nMUDHOLKAR, J.R.\n\nCITATION:\n 1962 AIR 1361\t\t  1962 SCR  Supl. (2) 211\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1979 SC1441\t (15,20)\n\n\nACT:\n     Income-Tax-Gratuity-Payment   of\t not\tin\npursuance of  any scheme  but voluntarily for long\nand valuable  services-Whether\tdeduction  can\tbe\nclaimed-Income-Tax Act,\t 1922 (11  of 1922), s. 10\n(2) (xv).\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The company  accepted the\tresignation of one\nof its\tdirectors and  in appreciation of his long\nvaluable services  to  the  company,  paid  him\t a\ngratuity of  Rs. 40,000\/-. This amount was claimed\nas a  deduction under s. 10(2) (xv) of the Income-\ntax Act\t which was  disallowed by  the\tIncome-tax\nOfficer, on  the ground that the appellant company\nhad no\tpension scheme;\t the payment was voluntary\nand that the entry in the assessee's books clearly\nindicated it to be a capital payment.\n^\n     Held, that\t the payment  does not fall within\nthe provisions\tof s.  10(2)(xv) of  the Act.  The\namount was  paid not in pursuance of any scheme of\npayment of  gratuities nor  was it an amount which\nthe recipient  expected to  be paid  for long  and\nfaithful  service  but\tit  was\t for  a\t voluntary\npayment\t not   with  the  object  of  facilitating\ncarrying on  the business of the appellant company\nor as  a matter\t of commercial\texpediency but\tin\nrecognition of\tlong and  faithful service.  There\nWas no\tpractice in  the appellant  company to pay\nsuch amounts  to and did not affect the quantum of\nsalary of the recipient.\n     To claim  a deduction  under s.  10(2)(xv) of\nthe Act\t the proper test to apply is, was that the\npayment\t made\tas  a  matter  of  practice  which\naffected the  quantum of  salary or  was there\tan\nexpectation by\tthe employee of getting a gratuity\nor was\tthe sum of money expended on the ground of\ncommercial expediency  and in  order indirectly to\nfacilitate the carrying on of the business.\n     J.\t P.   Hancok  v.  General  Raversionary\t &\nInvestment Co.\tLtd. (1918)  7 T. C. 358 and J. W.\nSmith v. The Incorporated Council of Law Reporting\nfor  England  and  Wales,  (1914)  6  T.  C.  477,\nREFERRED TO.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION:  Civil  Appeal
\nNo. 62 of 1961.\n<\/p>\n
212<\/span><\/p>\n
     Appeal by special leave from the judgment and
\norder dated  December 20, 1956, of the Madras High
\nCourt in Case Referred No. 85 of 1953.\n<\/p>\n
     A. V.  Viswanatha Sastri,\tR. Ganapathy  Iyer
\nand G. Gopalakrishnan for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
     K. N.  Rajagopala Sastri  and P.D.\t Menon for
\nthe respondent.\n<\/p>\n
     1961. December  20. The Judgment of the Court
\nwas delivered by
\n     KAPUR, J.-This  appeal by\tspecial\t leave\tis
\ndirected against  the judgment\tand order  of  the
\nHigh Court  of Judicature at Madras. The appellant
\nis  the\t  assessee  and\t  the  respondent  is  the
\nCommissioner of Income-tax and the question raised
\nis as  to applicability\t of s.\t10(2)(xv)  of  the
\nIndian Income-tax  Act to  a gratuity  paid by the
\nappellant to one of its officers on his retirement
\nfrom service.\n<\/p>\n
     The appeal\t relates to  the  assessment  year
\n1950-51. M\/s.  Gordon Woodroffee  &  Co.  (Madras)
\nLtd.,  was   incorporated  as  a  private  limited
\ncompany in 1922 and became the Managing Agent of a
\npublic\tlimited\t company  M\/s.\tGordon\tWoodroffee
\nLeather Manufacturing  Company Ltd.,  which is the
\nassessee. One  J. H.  Philips was  employee in the
\nManaging Agent\tCompany from 1922 to 1935 and from
\n1935  he  became  an  employee\tof  the\t appellant
\ncompany and  became its\t Director  from\t 1940.\tOn
\nMarch 22, 1949, he wrote a letter to the appellant
\ncompany expressing  his intention  to resign  from
\nthe Board  of the  Company as  from April  4, 1949
\nupon his  retirement from  the employment  of  the
\ncompany and  requested\tthat  his  resignation\tbe
\naccepted.  On\tMarch  24,   1949,  the\t Board\tof
\nDirectors  of\tthe  appellant\tCompany\t passed\t a
\nresolution that his resignation be accepted and in
\nappreciation of\t his long and valuable services to
\nCompany hebe paid a gratuity of Rs. 50,000\/- out
\n213<\/span>
\nof which  the appellant\t Company was  to  pay  Rs.
\n40,000\/-  and\tthe  Managing  Agent  Company  the
\nbalance\t of  Rs.  10,000\/-  April  4,  1949,  this
\nresolution  of\t the  Board   of   Directors   was
\nconfirmed. On  the same\t date a\t resolution to the
\nsame effect was passed at an Extraordinary General
\nMeeting of  the Company\t and before the end of its
\naccounting year\t i.  e.\t October  31,  1949,  this
\namount of  Rs. 40,000\/-\t was paid  to  Mr.  J.\tH.
\nPhilips.\n<\/p>\n
     This amount  was claimed as a deduction under
\ns. 10 (2)(xv) of the Income-tax Act which reads :-\n<\/p>\n
     Section 10(2) “Such profits or gains shall be
\ncomputed after\tmaking the  following  allowances,
\nnamely:\n<\/p>\n
     ………………………………………
\n..\n<\/p>\n
     ………………………………………
\n…\n<\/p>\n
\t  (xv)\tany   expenditure  (not\t being\tan
\n     allowance of  the nature  described in any of
\n     the claused  (i) to  (xiv) inclusive, and not
\n     being in the nature of capital expenditure or
\n     personal expenses of the assesee) laid out or
\n     expended  wholly\tand  exclusively  for  the
\n     purpose  of   such\t business,  profession\tor
\n     vocation.”\n<\/p>\n
The  amount   was  disallowed  by  the\tIncome-tax
\nOfficer as  well as  by\t the  Appellate\t Assistant
\nCommissioner on\t the  ground  that  the\t appellant
\nCompany had  no pension\t scheme; the  payment  was
\nvoluntary and  that the\t entry in  the\tassessee’s
\nbooks  clearly\t indicated  it\tto  be\ta  capital
\npayment. Against  this order the appellant Company
\ntook  an   appeal  to\tthe  Income-tax\t Appellate
\nTribunal which\tupheld the  order of the Appellate
\nAssistant Commissioner.\t It held that according to
\nthe resolution the gratuity was paid “for long and
\nvaluable services  to the Company”; that there was
\nnothing to  indicate that  Mr. J.  H. Philips  had
\naccepted a  lower salary in expectation of getting
\na gratuity at the end of his service; that there
\n214<\/span>
\nwas no\tsuch practice in the appellant Company and
\nthat during the course of his service he was being
\nremunerated at\ta graduated  scale of salary and a
\ncommission of  2-1\/2% on  the profits;\tthat there
\nwas no “expectancy” that at the end of the service
\nthere would  be\t a  recompense\tfor  faithful  and
\nefficient  service   that  he  had  been  suitably
\nrewarded  by  being  given  a  commission  on  the
\nprofits in  order to  whip up  his enthusiasm”. It
\nwas also  mentioned  that  in  the  books  of  the
\nappellant Company  the amount had not been debited
\nin the\tprofit and loss account but was debited to
\nthe appropriation  account thereby indicating that
\nit was\tan extra  payment or a payment made in the
\nnature of  a capital  expense.\tTaking\tall  these
\ncircumstances into consideration the Tribunal came
\nto the\tconclusion that\t it was\t difficult to hold
\nthat the  expenditure was  not in  the nature of a
\ncapital expenditure or that it was expended wholly
\nand exclusively\t for the purpose of the assessee’s
\nbusiness. At the instance of the appellant Company
\nthe case  was stated  to the  High Court  under s.
\n66(1) of  the Income-tax  Act  and  the\t following
\nquestion was referred :-\n<\/p>\n
\t  “Whether the sum of Rs. 40,000\/- paid to
\n     Mr. J.  H. Philips on his retirement from the
\n     service of\t the Company was not an admissible
\n     deduction\tunder  Section\t10(2)(xv)  of  the
\n     Income-tax Act, 1922.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The High  Court answered the question against
\nthe appellant  Company. It held that in order that
\ns. 10(2)  (xv) be  applicable it  had to be proved
\nthat the  amount was  laid out\tor expended wholly
\nand exclusively\t for  purposes\tof  the\t company’s
\nbusiness. In  this case\t the amount  was  paid\ton
\nretirement and\tfor valuable  services rendered by
\nMr. J.\tH. Philips;  there was no evidence that he
\nexpected to  receive this  amount or  the  Company
\ncontemplated its  payment at  any time before; the
\npayment
\n215<\/span>
\nwas voluntary  and there  was no  evidence to show
\nthat it was in the future interest of the business
\nof the\tCompany that the expenditure was incurred.
\nThe High Court observed:-\n<\/p>\n
\t  “In the  case of a payment of a gratuity
\n     to a  retiring employee  recognition  of  his
\n     past services,  with nothing  more cannot, in
\n     our  opinion   satisfy  the  requirements\tof
\n     Section 10(2)(xv), even if those requirements
\n     are judged\t from the view point of commercial
\n     expediency, as  it always\tshould be  when\t a
\n     claim arises under Section 10(2)(xv). Was the
\n     expenditure incurred  in the  future interest
\n     of the  business of  the assessee?\t Was there
\n     any connection  between the  purpose  of  the
\n     payment  and   the\t further  conduct  of  the
\n     business of  the assessee\t?  These  are  the
\n     tests to be satisfied before it could be said
\n     that in  paying the  gratuity money  was laid
\n     out or  expended wholly  and exclusively  for
\n     the purpose  of the  business of the Company.
\n     These tests  the assessee\tdid not satisfy in
\n     this case.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Against this  judgment\tand  order  the\t appellant
\nCompany has brought this appeal by special leave.\n<\/p>\n
     It was argued on behalf of the appellant that
\nthe amount had been paid as a matter of commercial
\nexpediency and\tin the\tinterest of the Company as
\nan inducement  to other\t employees  that  if  they
\nrendered  service   in\ta   similar  manner   with
\nefficiency and\thonesty they  would  be\t similarly
\nrewarded. Decisive  test, it  was  submitted,  was
\nwhether such  payments of  gratuity were likely in
\nfuture\talso  and  was\tthe  payment  made  as\tan
\nincentive to  the employees  to give their best to
\nthe employer and if it was so then the payment was
\na matter  of  commercial  prudence,  It\t was  also
\nsubmitted that\tthe Company had acted not with any
\noblique motive and
\n216<\/span>
\nits good  faith was not in doubt and in support of
\nthe contention several cases were relied upon.\n<\/p>\n
     In our  opinion on\t the findings as given the
\npayment\t in  dispute  does  not\t fall  within  the
\nprovisions of  s. 10(2)(xv).  The amount  was paid
\nnot in\tpursuance of  any  scheme  of  payment\tof
\ngratuities  nor\t  was  it   an\tamount\twhich  the
\nrecipient  expected   to  be  paid  for\t long  and
\nfaithful service  but it was voluntary payment not
\nwith the object of facilitating the carrying on of
\nthe business  of the  appellant Company\t or  as\t a
\nmatter of commercial expediency but in recognition
\nof long and faithful service of Mr. J. H. Philips.
\nThere was  no practice in the appellant company to
\npay such amounts and it did not affect the quantum
\nof salary of the recipient. The two cases strongly
\nrelied upon  by the  appellant Company\twere J. P.
\nHancok\tv.   General  Reversionary   &\tInvestment
\nCompany\t Ltd.(1)   and\tJ.   W.\t  Smith\t  v.   The
\nIncorporated Council  of Law Reporting for England
\nand Wales(2).  In the  former  case  the  assessee
\nCompany sought to charge as a trade expense a lump
\nsum which  it had  paid for  the purchase  for the
\nbenefit of  a former  actuary, of an annuity equal
\nin amount  to the  pension which  the Company  had
\nresolved to  pay him.  This  was  held\tto  be\tan
\nexpense\t admissible  in\t computing  the\t Company’s
\nprofits assessable to income-tax. But in that case
\nit was\tthe practice  of the  assessee company\tto
\ngrant\tpensions   to\tits   servants\t after\t a
\nconsiderable period  of service\t and this practice
\nwas known  to the  employees and affected the rate
\nof  salary   paid  by  the  Company  in\t that  the
\nemployees were\twilling to  serve the  Company\tat
\nlower rates  than they\totherwise  would  have\tby
\nreason of  the expectation  of the  pension at the
\nend of their service, In the latter case there was
\na practice of granting gratuities and that was the
\nground for  holding the\t  amount  to be\t a  proper
\ndeduction.\n<\/p>\n
217<\/span><\/p>\n
     In our  opinion the  proper test  to apply in
\nthis case  is, was the payment made as a matter of
\npractice which\taffected the  quantum of salary or
\nwas  there  an\texpectation  by\t the  employee\tof
\ngetting\t a  gratuity  or  was  the  sum\t of  money
\nexpended on  the ground\t of commercial\texpediency
\nand in order indirectly to facilitate the carrying
\non of  the business.  But this\thas not been shown
\nand  therefore\t the  amount   claimed\tis  not\t a
\ndeductible item under s. 10(2)(xv)
\n     The appeal\t therefore fails  and is dismissed
\nwith costs.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t Appeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961 Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 1361, 1962 SCR Supl. (2) 211 Author: K L. Bench: Sinha, Bhuvneshwar P.(Cj), Kapur, J.L., Hidayatullah, M., Shah, J.C., Mudholkar, J.R. PETITIONER: GORDON WOODROFFEE LEATHER MANUFACTURING CO. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, […]<\/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-80890","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nGordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-19T12:30:57+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961\",\"datePublished\":\"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-19T12:30:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\"},\"wordCount\":1647,\"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\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\",\"name\":\"Gordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-19T12:30:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961\"}]},{\"@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":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-19T12:30:57+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961","datePublished":"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-19T12:30:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961"},"wordCount":1647,"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\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961","name":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... on 20 December, 1961 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1961-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-19T12:30:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gordon-woodroffee-leather-vs-the-commissioner-of-income-tax-on-20-december-1961#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gordon Woodroffee Leather … vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, … on 20 December, 1961"}]},{"@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\/80890","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=80890"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80890\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}