SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(Cal) 45

A.N.SEN, SANKAR PRASAD MITRA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
NAWN ESTATE PRIVATE LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.PAL, Chandan Kumar, N.C.MUKHARJI, PRABIR MUKHERJI

SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a private limited company. Its shares were held by the members of the Nawn family. Its main source of income was from property assessed under Section 9 of the Act in the relevant years. There is no dispute that the provisions of Section 23a of the Act are applicable to the assessee.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for our purposes to invoke the provisions of Section 23a in the assessment years under consideration are as follows :

Dividend declared

1955-56 31-3-1955 236,242 100,562 135,680 100,000

1956-57 31-3-1956 250,464 108,795 141,669 100,000

1957-58 31-3-1957 257,986 151,087 106,899 87,500

1959-60 31-3-1959 361,338 209,505 151,333 100,000

Assessment year

Accounting year ended

Total income assessed Tax payable Undistributed balance of total income

( 3 ) NOW, Section 23a gives power to the Income-tax Officer to assess companies to super-tax on undistributed income in certain cases. Explanation 2 to the section prescribes the different statutory percentages in the cases of different classes of companies. A company in order to avoid the



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top