It may be pointed out that the Incometax Officer on processing the income found the total income to be Rs.
The appeals of the assessee Company under the Income tax Act failed.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by HIDAYATULLAH, J. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay dated August 3, 1956, in a reference under s. 66 1 of the Indian Income tax Act by the Appellate Tribunal, Bombay.
The Tribunal referred four questions for the decision of the High Court.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated August 3, 1956, of the Bombay High Court in Incometax Reference No.
The Finance Act, 1953, with the modifications will be referred to briefly, hereinafter, as the Finance Act.
1,87,691.
5,02,915.
He calculated additional income tax on it at 5 annas in the rupee after deducting income tax borne by the profits of the previous year at 4 annas per rupee, a surcharge of 5 per cent.
30,680.
That Finance Act applied the Finance Act, 1951, with some changes.
23,965.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
A. Palkhivala, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji and Rameshwar Nath, for the respondents.
We are companycerned with the assessment year 1953 54, and the Finance Act, 1953, is applicable.
It has certified this case as fit for appeal to this Court, and hence this appeal.
The High Court did number answer the first question because it was number pressed, and answered the remaining in the negative, after modifying them.
10 of 1956.
N. Rajagopal Sastri and D. Gupta, for the appellant.
The assessee Company has its year of account ending June 30 every year.
At the close of the account year 1951, it carried forward profits amounting to Rs.
May 4.
This additional tax amounted to Rs.
21,115 4 0.
The Income tax Officer found that the assessee Company had declared excess dividends amounting to Rs.
The Com missioner of Income tax, Bombay City, is the appellant, and the Khatau Makanji Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd., Bombay, the assessee Company , is the respondent.
303 of 1958.
