9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (7) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orm M/s A. Y. AR. M. AR. Firm, Seramban, Malaysia is includible in the total income of the assessee, a resident HUF in accordance with the provisions of the Avoidance of Double Taxation Agreement between India and Malaysia. The assessee is resident HUF and drives income from property, own business and share income from A. Y. AR. M. AR. Firm, Seramban, Malaysia and also share income from M/s AR.M.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t arise for consideration in the case decided by the High Court. 3. The Revenue is in appeal urging that the order of the AAC should be set aside and that of the ITO be restored. The ld. Departmental Representative urged that the directions of the AAC to delete such portions of the foreign income as has been assessed in Malaysia was not in keeping with the IT Act or the observation of the Madras ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come was not taxed in Malaysia the same was taxable in India. In this view of the matter, he directed the ITO to revise the assessment accordingly. On appeal the Tribunal did not accept the interpretation of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement given by the AAC. The reference application under s. 256(1) was refused by the Tribunal and the High Court has called for a statement of he case under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income. In this view of the matter, therefore, the High Court did not accept the question referred to by the Tribunal and dismissed the petition. From the above facts it will be abundantly clear that the High Court has not answered the question and, therefore, the High Court has not decided the issue on merits of the case. Further the whole approach of the issue was confined to double income taxat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
