Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court includes capital gains in average rate for relief on inter-corporate dividends</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Central Bank Of India Limited</h3> Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Central Bank Of India Limited - [1990] 185 ITR 6, 88 CTR 94 Issues Involved:1. Whether the average rate of income-tax should be worked out with reference to the total income of the company as reduced by the amount of capital gains for computing the relief u/s 85A on inter-corporate dividends. Summary:1. Background and Reference:The case involves a reference made u/s 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerning the assessment year 1967-68. The question is whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the average rate of income-tax should be computed by excluding long-term capital gains for the purpose of relief u/s 85A on inter-corporate dividends.2. Tribunal's Decision:The Tribunal had directed that long-term capital gains should be excluded from the total income for calculating the average rate of income-tax for the purposes of section 85A. This was based on the context in which 'average rate of income-tax' was used in section 85A, suggesting it should be independent of section 2(10).3. Relevant Provisions:- Section 85A: Provides for a deduction of tax on inter-corporate dividends.- Section 2(10): Defines the average rate of income-tax.- Section 2(24): Includes capital gains as part of income.4. Previous Judgments:The court referred to the judgment in Birla Bombay P. Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 121 ITR 142, which held that the average rate of income-tax should be calculated as per section 2(10) without excluding capital gains. This view was also supported by the Calcutta High Court in ITO v. Raleigh Investment Co. Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 616.5. Assessee's Argument:The assessee argued that the average rate for section 85A should exclude capital gains because the rate for capital gains is prescribed by the Income-tax Act (section 115) and not by the Finance Acts.6. Court's Analysis:The court found no warrant for excluding capital gains from the total income for calculating the average rate of income-tax u/s 85A. The court emphasized that 'income' as defined u/s 2(24) includes capital gains, and the average rate of income-tax should be computed as per section 2(10).7. Anomaly Argument:The assessee contended that including capital gains would result in different tax rates for different companies, which was not the intention of section 85A. The court rejected this argument, stating that section 85A does not prescribe a tax rate but a deduction mechanism.8. Circulars and External Aids:The court examined Circulars No. 3-P and 4-P and found that they did not mandate a flat 25% tax rate on inter-corporate dividends but explained the mechanism of section 85A. The court held that these circulars did not bind the Revenue to levy tax only at 25%.9. Conclusion:The court concluded that there was no ambiguity in section 85A and no need to resort to external aids of interpretation. The question was answered in the negative, in favor of the Revenue, stating that the average rate of income-tax should include capital gains for the purposes of section 85A.10. Costs:There was no order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found