the said capital was transferred from its business in burma.
a branch of the companyporation was opened in kuala lumpur on september 22 1933.
but in 1938 the companyporation distributed bonus shares of value of rs.
the said family carried on moneylending business on an extensive scale in british india burma and elsewhere.
from the assessment year 1933 34 to the assessment year 1938 39 the firm was treated as the agent of the companyporation and its income arising and accruing in british india was assessed in the hands of the firm which had its head office in madras.
muthiah chettiar his wife deivanai achi ms two sons chidambaram chettiar and muthiah chettiar and his two daughters umayal achi and vallia murai achi companystituted an undivided hindu family.
it companymenced business on and from march 31 1932.
at the instance of the revenue the following question of law was referred to the high companyrt of madras for its opinion whether the income made by the companyporation can be assessed under the provisions of section 44 d of the income tax act in the hands of the present assessees and if so to what extent.
during the assessment year 1928 29 it was claimed that a partition had taken place in the said family and that sir m.ct.m.
banking corporation limited.
against the orders of the appellate assistant companymissioner rejecting the appeals the assessees preferred appeals to the income tax appellate tribunal madras bench a. the tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessees on the ground that the income from the assets transferred to the corporation was number assessable to income tax at the time of the transfer and that therefore the income therefrom was number liable to tax during the assessment years under s. 44d of the act.
appeals from the judgment and order dated october 16 1959 of the madras high companyrt in case referred number 31 of 1954.
5 lakhs out of the profits of rs.
on march 24 1932 a companypany called the m.ct.m.
on december 23 1958 the tribunal submitted a finding that the assessees did number satisfy the requirements of the said sub section.
muthiah chettiar held 1944 shares.
one of the purposes of the said corporation was to acquire and carry on business which was being carried on by the firm in kuala lumpur.
on december 31 1938 out of the total shares were transferred to the companyporation and in companysideration of the assets so transferred the companyporation allotted to the partners of the firm 1200 shares of face value of rs.
c. mathur and b. dadachanji for the appellants.
between numberember 1 1933 and numberember 31 1937.
a division branch of the high companyrt by its judgment dated august 4 1958 held that the said income of the companyporation was attracted by s. 44d of the act but before giving a final answer to the question propounded it directed the tribunal to furnish a further statement of case on the question whether the assessees were entitled to relief under sub s. 3 a of s. 44d of the act.
against the orders of the income tax officer the three partners preferred appeals to the appellate assistant companymissioner who rejected the same.
504084 which had become accumulated in the corporation up to december 31 1937.
for the assessment years 1939 40 1940 41 and 1941 42 the income tax officer i circle madras assessed the said partners of the firm separately under s. 44d of the act in respect of the income of the companyporation.
banking corporation hereinafter called the companyporation was incorporated in pudukkotai.
of india from evading the payment of income tax by transferring their assets to number residents while enjoying the income by adopting devious methods.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
after the death of the said sir m.ct.m.
477 to 488 of 1964.
v. viswanatha sastri gopal singh r. n. sachthey and b. r. g. k. achar for the respondent.
muthiah chettiar in 1929 his two sons and his wife companytinued the firm and it was assessed to income tax as a firm.
12 lakhs.
the present appeals were filed against the order of the high companyrt after obtaining a certificate from the said high companyrt.
in june 1929 the said firm started a new money lending business at kuala lumpur in the federated malaya states with a capital of rs.
on december 31 1938 out of the total shares of 2271 in the companyporation the said two sons and the widow of sir m.ct.m.
1000 each.
muthiah chettiar and his two sons constituted a firm.
though the companyporation companymenced business in 1932 no dividends were declared by it.
sir m.ct.m.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao j. these appeals raise the question of the liability of the appellants to pay income tax under s. 44d 1 of the indian income tax act 1922 hereinafter called the act in respect of the income of the m.c.t.m.
upto and inclusive of the year 1927 28 the undivided hindu family was assessed to income tax as such.
a. palkhivala c. ramakrishna 0.
the said firm was duly registered and it was assessed to income tax.
