Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether dividend proposed out of general reserve is to be deducted from general reserve while computing capital under rule 2(ii) of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964; and whether the provision for gratuity should be treated as a reserve included in capital for surtax computation.
Analysis: On the first question, the earlier view relied on by the Tribunal was held to be incorrect in light of the later Full Bench decision, and the Tribunal was found to have erred in following the earlier case. The question had to be answered by applying the later authoritative view on computation of capital under the Second Schedule. On the second question, the record was insufficient for a final determination, and the matter required reconsideration by the Tribunal in the light of the Supreme Court ruling on whether an amount set apart for gratuity can be treated as a reserve.
Conclusion: The first question was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. The second issue was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered partly in favour of the Revenue, and the matter was sent back to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the gratuity-reserve issue.
Ratio Decidendi: For surtax capital computation, the controlling later authoritative view on the treatment of reserves must be followed, and where the factual basis is insufficient on a gratuity-related reserve question, the Tribunal must reconsider the issue in accordance with the governing Supreme Court ruling.