Supreme Court

01.11.1954

Navinchandra Mafatlal v. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City

MANU/SC/0070/1954

Giving a constitutional enactment the widest possible meaning

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 :