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

1971 Supreme(Cal) 66

SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, K.L.RAY
TARULATA SHYAM – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.N.BASU, A.P.Choudhury, B.L.PAL, N.L.PAL, S.R.PAL

K. L. ROY, J.

( 1 ) THE assessee and the original applicant in this reference was one P. C. Shyam who died during the pendency of the reference and his heirs and legal representatives have been substituted in his place as the applicants.

( 2 ) THE assessee was substantial shareholder and managing director of Duiaguri Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. Admittedly, the company is one in which the public are not substantially interested within the meaning of Section 23a of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act" ). The reference concerns the assessment year 1957-58, the corresponding previous year being the calender year 1956. At the commencement of that year there was a credit balance of Rs. 65,246 in the assessee's account in the books of the said company brought forward from the earlier year. Between the 11th January and the 12th November the cash withdrawals by the assessee from the company amounted to Rs. 4,97,442. Deducting therefrom the opening credit balance of Rs. 65,246 and outstanding dividends of Rs. 1,40,000 declared on the 31st December, 1955, in favour of the assessee's major sons transferred to his account and a further dividend of Rs. 19,493 credited t















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