9911796707
TMI Blog1945 (8) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act asking the opinion of the Court upon the following question:- "Whether in the circumstances of the case and on the finding of the fact arrived at by the Tribunal, it can be said that the remuneration of ₹ 9,250 received by the director could be said to be the income of the family". It is necessary to state the facts which have been found out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erent, but these are received from the private limited company owned by the two families, and, therefore, the sums received by them cannot be viewed in any other aspect than the income of the joint family. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated the 27th July, 1943, accepted the contention of the assessee and held: "The income arising out of the assets of the family is only the dividends a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir disposal. He, therefore, argued that this was a case where the income of the directors arose from the aid of the joint family funds and must in law be treated as the income of the joint Hindu family. I am unable to agree with this contention. The joint family property has not been spent in this case in earning the remuneration of the directors. The dividends that were earned on the shares are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
