TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court clarifies High Court's role in tax reference appeals, emphasizes advisory nature</h1> <h3>CP Sarathy Mudaliar Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, AP</h3> CP Sarathy Mudaliar Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, AP - [1966] 62 ITR 576 Issues:Assessment of dividend income as the income of a Hindu undivided family. Interpretation of section 2(6A)(e) of the Income-tax Act. High Court's jurisdiction in a reference under section 66 of the Income-tax Act.Analysis:The case involved the assessment of dividend income as the income of a Hindu undivided family under the Income-tax Act. The assessee, a Hindu undivided family, held shares in a limited company, and the dividend earned on these shares was considered as the family's income. Additionally, the managing director's remuneration from the company was also treated as the family's income. In the assessment years 1955-56 and 1956-57, the family was charged tax on sums advanced as loans, claimed to represent dividend income under section 2(6A)(e) of the Act. The Tribunal held that since the family was not the registered shareholder of the company, the loans could not be treated as dividend income of the family.The matter was referred to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which set aside the Tribunal's order and directed a reconsideration of whether the payments were made on behalf of or for the benefit of the shareholders. The High Court emphasized the need to assess payments made by a company for the individual benefit of a shareholder. However, the Supreme Court found the High Court's procedure erroneous, stating that in a reference under section 66 of the Income-tax Act, the High Court's role is advisory, not appellate. The High Court was required to answer the question posed and remit the case back to the Tribunal for further action based on its opinion.Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the case to be remanded to the High Court for proper consideration and disposal in accordance with the law. The appeals were allowed, and the case was remanded without any order as to costs.
TaxTMI 