9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (12) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the I.T. Act, 1961. His assessment was finalised on January 13, 1971. The order was reopened later for, in the return, Rs. 3,600, being dividend received by him from M/s. Aruna Roller Flour Mills Private Limited, Mandapaka, was not shown by him. Therefore, the ITO, under s. 148 of the Act, reopened the assessment and included the amount and taxed it. Venkatesam Chetty protested against the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt is proper. The question raised is no more res integra. It is covered by, at least, three cases of the Supreme Court. In the first case, in Dalmia v. CIT [1964] 53 ITR 83 (SC), the distinction between " interim dividend " and " dividend " was elucidated. That distinction is not relevant in the instant case as Rs. 3,600 dividend is not an interim dividend which can be rescinded before payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e difference between the two expressions, it was pointed out, the latter necessarily " involves the idea of division between several persons which is the same as payment to several persons ". It was held that when dividend is declared by a company, it is chargeable to tax as income of the year in which it is so declared. The fact that actual payment of the income is deferred is irrelevant. It was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " was brought out: "........ the Legislature had not made dividend income taxable in the year in which it became due; by express words of the statute, it was taxable only in the year in which it was paid, credited or distributed or was deemed to be paid, credited or distributed " and some relevant cases were cited to hold that " in the absence of any evidence to show that the dividend warrants wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... que in May, 1970, and the other he maintains cash system of accounts. The two aspects were not borne in mind by the income-tax authorities when they reopened the assessment. We are of the view, on the facts of this case, may be, the dividend was declared on March 28, 1970. Having regard to the cash system adopted by the assessee and the fact that the cheque was received by him on May 11, 1970, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
