The Commissioner of Income tax, West Bengal aggrieved by this decisions has brought these appeals to this Court on the strength of the certificates given by the High Court.
As facts in each of these appeals are more or less similar, it is sufficient if we set out the facts in the case of Kamal Behari Lal Singha, for the assessment year 1950 51, the companyresponding accounting year being 1356 B. S. ending On April 13, 1950.
13,200 as dividend from the said companypany.
The assessee therein was also one of the share holders of Ukhara Estate Zamindaries Ltd. His case was numberdifferent from that of the respondents herein.
8,829 was paid out of the accumulated capital gains, received by the companypany in the shape of Selamis and land acquisition companypensation receipts after March 31, 1948.
Appeals from the judgment and order dated August 30, 1967 of the Calcutta High Court in Income tax Reference Nos.
It is said that Kamal Behari Lal Singha, who will hereinafter be referred to as the assessee was a shareholder in the Ukhara Estate Zamindaries Ltd. to be hereinafter referred to as the companypany .
But disagreeing with the,, view taken by these authorities ,the High Court answered both these questions in favour of the assessees.
On both these questions the decision of the authorities under the Indian Income tax Act, 1922 in brief the Act ,as well as that of the Tribunal was against the assessees.
see what it is in the hands of the receiver and number its nature in the hands of the payer.
3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and II of 1964.
The remainder of the dividends was paid out of the balance of the profit and loss account In these appeals the dispute centers round the taxability of that share of the dividend which has been paid out of the capital gains in the hands, of the companypany.
During the relevant accounting year, the assessee received a sum of Rs.
The Income tax Officer came to the companyclusion that numberdividend distributed can be companysidered as having been paid out of the capital gains of the companypany, therefore the same is taxable as dividend.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the receipt by the assessee of the amount attributable to selamis realised by the Ukhara Estate Zamindaries Ltd., for grant of long term leases after 31st March, 1948 was a receipt of income of the assessee and tax,able as the income of the assessee from other sources?
1667 to 1673 to 1968.
of the receiver and the source from which the payment is.
Out of that amount a sum of Rs.
Sukumar Ghose and Swapna Ghosh, for the appellant in all the appeals , The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. Two questions of law which arise for decision in these appeals are Whether on the facts and in the circum stances of the case of Tribunal was right in holding that the distribution to the assessee of the amount attributable to land acquisition companypensation received by the Ukhara Estate Zamindaries Ltd. after 31st March, 1948 was in the hands of the assessee, receipt of dividend within the meaning of Section 2 A of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922 ?
D. Sharma, for the appellant in all the appeals .
Such capital gains were taken to the reserve fund and thereafter distributed as dividends.
The said dividend was declared on October 19, 1949.
