2,28,392 should be subjected to tax at the companycessional rates mentioned in the Schedule to the Order as held by the High Court The assessee, is a Hindu Undivided Family with its Head office at Indore and branches at several other places in some of the former B States including tile State of Madhya Bharat.
With regard to the other question, the High.
This income was subjected to income tax and super tax at the rates prescribed by the Finance Act, 1950, rejecting the claim of the assessee for companycession in regard to this income under the Order.
This companytention was number accepted by the Income Tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal.
whether the assessee was entitled to take the financial year as the relevant previous year.
Hence this appeal.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated October 28, 1960 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc.
2,62,860 should number have been apportioned as the Income Tax Officer had done as neither income tax number supertax was leviable on those profits and in, any case, super tax was.
So far as the first question is companycerned viz.
The balance of Rs.
and Whether for the purpose of bringing to tax the dividend income of the assessee for the assessment year 1950 51 and having regard to the provisions of Part B States Taxation Concessions Order, 1950 in short Order , the dividend income say of Rs.
34,468 gross Rs.
34,468 to Rs.
50,137 under s. 16 2 of the Act.
281 ok 1958.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil, Appeal No.
27 of 1969.
50,137 as well as the dividend income of Rs.
managing agency and selling agency and financing of the Binod Mills Limited, Ujjain for the purpose of assessment for the assessment year 1950 51 whether the year ended 31 3 1950 or the year ended Diwali, 1949 ?
Civil Case No.
Court held, that the income tax payable on the, entire dividend income included in the total income after exclusion of the number taxable dividend under paragraph 12 of the Order would be at the companycessional rates prescribed in the Order and further that the assessee is liable to pay super tax at the companycessional rates mentioned in that Order on the entire dividend income.
The Tribunal rejected the companytention of the assessee that the dividend income of Rs.
the same is companycluded by our decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Madhya Pradesh v. Karchanbai Civil Appeal No.
C. Chagla, Rameshwar Nath, Mahinder Narain, and Swaranjit sodhi, for the respondent.
K. Aiyar and B.D. Sharma, for the appellant.
They are What is the previous year in respect of ,the source of income, viz.
The Judge ment of the Court was delivered by Hedge, J. In this appeal by certificate, brought by the Com missioner of Income Fax, Nagpur, two questions arise for companysideration.
2,28,392 was number subject to super tax under paragraph 12 of the Order and that the amount of Rs.
