The T.O. charged this sum to tax and the assessment was companyfirmed both by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal.
The High Court granted certificates under s. 66A 2 of the Act both to the Assessee A and the Commissioner of Income Tax.
The Appellate Tribunal then referred the first three questions to the High Court but refused to refer the following question Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the relief allowed in the assessment under section 23 3 on that portion of dividend income from Narandas Rajaram Co. Private Ltd., which is attributable to the, income of the Company arising in Pakistan can be withdrawn while making re assessment under section 34 1 b ?
704, 706, 707, 709, 710, 711, 713 and 714 of 1963 and respondents in C.As.
It is number necessary to give the facts in the cases of other assessees for, apart from the amount of dividend involved, the facts are similar.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, T. A. Ramachandran J B. Dada chanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Nairain, for the appellants in C.A. Nos.
579 and Rs.
The appeals involving question D are by the Commissioner of Income Tax and appeals involving questions I to 3 are by assessees.
But in his re assessment order, dated January 17, 1955, the Income Tax Officer brought to charge number only the said Rs.
1,71,992 declared by the Company on 14 10 1952 is properly includible in the total income of the assessee of the previous year S.Y. 2008 for the assessment year 1953 54 ?
On February 7, 1961, the High Court granted the necessary certificate to Assessee A. The Commissioner of Income Tax, sup./64 7 however, did number appeal against the judgment of the High Court on the supplementary question.
705, 708, 713 and 715 of 1963 .
V. Gupte, Additional Solicitor General, R. Ganapathy Iyer and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellants in C.A. Nos.
The certificate issued by the companypany under s. 20 of the Act also stated that half of the amount of the dividend was payable on or after October 16, 1952, and the balance was payable within 2 months after remittances from Pakistan become free.
41, 42, 43, 57, 58, 5 9, 69, and 77 of 1957.
23,167 was attributable to the profits of that companypany which accrued in Pakistan.
On the Appellate Tribunal referring the said question, the High Court by its judgment dated April 14, 1960, answered the question in favour of the assessee.
2,722 in the total income but held that numberincome tax or super tax was payable in respect of this amount.
1958, of the Bombay High Court in Income tax Reference No,,.
On October 14, 1952, the following resolution was adopted at the ordinary general meeting of Narandas Rajaram Co. Ltd. Dividends, as mentioned below, be and are hereby declared out of the profits of the Company A dividend of 4 per cent on A Preference Shares and 4 per cent on B Preference Shares.
Whether the said P. portion of the dividend income forms part of the assessees total income as that term is defined in section 2 15 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 ?
The companypany declared dividend out of the above profits.
705, 708, 712, and 715 of 1963 and respondents in C.A. Nos.
A moiety of the amount of the dividend be paid to the share holders on and after 16th October, 1952 whose names appear on the Register of the Company as on 6th October, 1952, and the other moiety be postponed for payment within two months from the date on which remittances from Pakistan become free and the moneys are actually received.
The High Court, by its judgment dated March 17, 1958, answered the three questions against the Assessee.
On an application of Assessee A, the Tribunal referred three questions the first question is Question D, the second question is similar to the question No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri J. This judgment will dispose of 12 appeals from the judgments of the High Court of Bombay, dated March 17, 1958, whereby the High Court answered the questions referred to it partly in favour of the assessee and partly in favour of the Department.
Two questions were referred to the High Court.
Appeals from the judgments and orders dated March 17.
Assessee A took out a numberice of motion for a reference of the said question.
The fourth question D arose in the case of Assessee A for the assessment year 1953 54 under the following circumstances.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
On May 20, 1952, the I.T.O. included this sum of Rs.
As a result of this order, Rs.
The High Court also directed the Appellate Tribunal to refer the above question hereinafter to be referred to as the Supplementary Question which the Appellate Tribunal had declined to refer.
2,722.
2,722 for the assessment year 1949 50.
In the case of Assessee A, the portion of the dividend attributable to the profits that accrued in Pakistan amounted to Rs.
579 suitably grossed was valid ?
704 to 715 of 1963.
704, 706, 707, 709, 710, 711, 713 and 714 of 1963 .
The High Court on July 10, 1959, granted the certificate of fitness under S. 66A 2 of the Act.
579 was deemed to have accrued to him.
Whether having regard to the provisions of the Indo Pakistan Agreement, the assessee is entitled to any relief on the said P. portion of dividend income?
The Income Tax Officer included the entire amount of Rs.
1,71,992 in the total income of Assessee A. Both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Appellate Tribunal companyfirmed this.
A dividend of 32 per cent free of income tax on the Ordinary Shares and a companysequential additional dividend at the rate of 13 per cent free of income tax on B Preference Shares.
For the assessment year 1952 53, the net dividend received by Assessee A from Narandas Rajaram Co., Ltd. was Rs.
579 but also the said sum of Rs.
The Appellate Tribunal also upheld the order.
1,12,867 out of which Rs.
The Income Tax Officer reopened the assessment of 1949 50 because Assessee A was a shareholder in Industrial Corporation Ltd., and an order had been passed under s. 23A of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 hereinafter referred to as the Act in respect of this Corporation.
2,722, i.e., the Pakistan portion of the dividend received from Narandas Rajaram Ltd. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the assessment order both in respect of Rs.
