LANDMARK CASE

McDowell and Co. v. Commercial Tax Officer

(1985) 3 SCC 230 · Supreme Court of India · Tax law

At a glance

Citation: (1985) 3 SCC 230
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Tax law
In one line: No. Colourable devices to avoid tax are not permissible.

1 Facts

A company arranged sales to avoid excise duty.

2 Issue

Is tax avoidance through colourable devices allowed?

3 What the court decided

No. Colourable devices to avoid tax are not permissible.

4 Why it matters

Often contrasted with Azadi Bachao.

5 Think about it

Is tax planning legitimate?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Tax law

Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan (2004) 10 SCC 1
Vodafone International Holdings v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 613

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Mary Roy v. State of Kerala Medha Kotwal Lele v. Union of India →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.