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>Appellate Tribunal clarifies dividend deduction under Surtax Act</h1> <h3>Geoffrey Manners And Company Limited. Versus Income Tax Officer.</h3> Geoffrey Manners And Company Limited. Versus Income Tax Officer. - ITD 002, 430, TTJ 016, 291, Issues:- Interpretation of provisions of section 80AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in relation to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964.- Whether only the net amount of dividend or the gross amount of dividend should be deductible while computing chargeable profits under the Surtax Act.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT BOMBAY-A dealt with appeals related to the surtax assessment of an appellant company for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78. The primary issue revolved around the interpretation of section 80AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 concerning the deduction of dividends while computing chargeable profits under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The appellant contended that the gross amount of dividends should be deducted, while the authorities had allowed only the net amount to be deducted based on the retrospective amendment to section 80M of the Income-tax Act by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the authorities' decision, citing the insertion of section 80AA with retrospective effect and the definition of 'income by way of dividends' under section 80AA.The appellant argued that section 80AA was not applicable to assessments under the Surtax Act and relied on an Explanation added to the Surtax Act by the Finance Act, 1981, effective from 1-4-1981. The appellant contended that this Explanation, unlike section 80AA, was prospective in operation, indicating Parliament's intention. The revenue, however, maintained that section 80AA should be read along with the Surtax Act's provisions and supported the authorities' decision. The Tribunal considered both arguments and analyzed the legislative intent behind the amendments.The Tribunal, after careful consideration, agreed with the appellant's contentions. It referred to precedents where the expression 'income by way of dividends' was interpreted to mean gross dividends received by the assessee, not the net amount. The Tribunal highlighted that the retrospective amendment through section 80AA was specific to clarifying the deduction allowable under section 80M and did not extend to defining 'income by way of dividends' under the Surtax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the Explanation added to the Surtax Act was prospective, indicating Parliament's intent not to apply section 80AA to Surtax Act assessments. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the authorities to deduct the gross amount of dividends in computing the appellant's chargeable profits under the Surtax Act.In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment clarified the application of section 80AA in relation to the Surtax Act and emphasized the importance of legislative intent in interpreting tax provisions. The decision provided clarity on the deduction of dividends for computing chargeable profits under the Surtax Act, aligning with the appellant's arguments based on statutory interpretation and precedents.
TaxTMI 