9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (3) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e-tax Act, 1922, as in force, the amount of Rs. 4,16,256 repayable to the assessee out of the E.P.T. deposit was properly excluded ? " The respondent-assessee is a limited liability company. The question relates to the accounting year 1950 ending with March 31, 1950, and the assessment year 1950-51. In connection with the accounts of the above accounting year, the annual general meeting of the assessee-company was held on December 23, 1950. According to the approved balance-sheet of the company, the commercial profits came to Rs. 5,18,364. The assessable income was determined at Rs. 8,66,503. The tax liability in respect of the above assessable income was Rs. 3,52,070. In the result, upon deduction of the above tax liability from the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sum of Rs. 5,14,486 shall be deemed to have been distributed as dividend amongst shareholders as on December 23, 1960, on which date the general meeting of the company was held. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside that order on October 15, 1960. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated October 10, 1962, confirmed the findings made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the original order of the Income-tax Officer thus stands reversed. In support of the question raised before us, Mr. Joshi for the revenue submits that the Appellate Tribunal accepted the contention of the department that Rs. 3,83,691 which were refundable in respect of excess profits tax recovered from the assessee-company were liable to be included in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been observed by Subba Rao J., who delivered the judgment of the court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gangadhar Banerjee, the profits which can be compelled to be distributed as dividends under section 23A must be commercial profits in the year of account in respect whereof the powers under section 23A are intended to be exercised. The first submission made by Mr. Joshi, on the face of it, is without any substance. The amounts which were required to be deposited as excess profits tax deposits have been described in the Ordinance No. XVI of 1943 in the following manner : " when excess profits tax......becomes payable......after assessment made...., the person liable to pay such excess profits tax shall deposit....,a fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
