December 4.
The High Court answered the question in the affirmative though the reasons upon which the learned judges companystituting the bench deciding the case based themselves were somewhat different.
N. Rajagopal Sastri and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
The assessee has number companye to this Court in further appeal.
The Commissioner of Income tax, Bombay City, respondent before us, moved the Appellate Tribunal to state a case to the High Court of Bombay on the following question of law which arose out of the Tribunals order Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is liable to pay interest in respect of dividend income as provided under s. 18 A 6 of the Income tax Act The Tribunal stated a case on the aforesaid question and the reference made by the Tribunal was dealt with by a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay by its judgment dated July 3, 1959.
The judgment of Das, Kapur and Hidayatullah, jj.,
Appeal from the judgment and order dated July 3, 1959, of the Bombay High Court in 1.
was delivered by Das, J. The judgment of Sarkar and Dayal, jj.,
By a numberice issued under s. 18 A 1 of the Act the Income tax Officer companycerned required the assessee to make advance payment of tax in respect of the assessment year 1947 1948.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
4,64,000/ .
The Income tax Officer took the view that under s. 18 A 2 of the Act the assessee was bound to include in his estimate, and to pay advance super tax on, his dividend income.
On September 15, 1946, the assessee submitted an estimate of his income under sub s, 2 of s. 18 A. In this estimate the assessee showed his total income at Rs.
was delivered by Sarkar, J. K. DAs, J. This is an appeal on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court of Bombay under s. 66.A 2 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922.
3,64,000/ , stated to be his dividend income, on the ground that s. 18 of the Act applied to such income.
597 of 1961.
10,000/ on the ground of double taxation relief, the assessee estimated the advance tax payable by him at Rs.
The short facts giving rise to the appeal are these.
45 of 1958.
After claiming credit for Rs.
The original assessee was Purshottamdas Thakurdas, a well known businessman of Bombay.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, N. A. Palkhivala, J. B. Daduchanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.
Since that was number done and the advance tax paid was less than eighty per cent of the tax determined on the basis of the regular assessment, he levied penal interest on the assessee under sub s. 6 of s. 18 A of the Act in respect of the super tax payable on the dividend income.
T. Reference No.
Pending the appeal here, the assessee died and his legal representatives have been substituted in his place and are the appellants number.
He deducted the sum of Rs.
Thereafter, at the instance of the respondent Commissioner of Income tax, the Tribunal referred under s. 66 1 of the Act the following questions for the decision of the High Court.
He then appealed to the Income tax Appellate Tribu nal and was successful there.
