Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)The Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Bombay ... vs Bipinchandra Maganlal And Co. ... on 17 November, 1960
11. The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the application on the ground that although the question presented before it was no doubt a question of law, but since the same had been decided by this court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bipinchandra Maganlal & Co. Ltd., the question was merely academic and could not, therefore, be made the subject-matter of reference under section 66(1) of the Act. In paragraph 2 of its order rejecting the application, it observed :
Income Tax Rules, 1962
Sardar Indra Singh And Sons Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax,West ... on 23 September, 1953
8. The Appellate Tribunal apparently treated the dividend of Rs. 2,75,840 declared as being fictional or notional receipt. The Tribunal then considered the decisions of this court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Bipinchandra Maganlal & Co., Indra Singh & Sons Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax and George N. Houry v. Commissioner of Income-tax. Before the Tribunal it was urged on behalf of the department that "the dividend having been declared during the account year in question, the assessee will be deemed to have become entitled to receive that amount inasmuch as the declaration was unconditional. The assessee could even sue the company for realisation of the dividend declared. In that view of the matter. . . . since a declaration is made, the dividend no more remains a deemed income but becomes an actuality. " The Appellate Tribunal repelled these arguments by observing :
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1