https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161988 Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935 barred the suit because the dispute concerned revenue in its ordinary sense; the validity of the underlying tax did not have to be decided first, and a bona fide challenge to assessment or demand remained within the exclusion. The suit was therefore not maintainable. Section 4(1)(c) and Explanation 3 to Section 4(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act were upheld because dividends paid outside British India were treated as having a real territorial nexus with British India where they were paid out of profits earned there. The impugned provisions were thus intra vires, and the action failed on both maintainability and merits. en-us Mon, 27 Mar 1944 00:00:00 +0630 Sat, 27 May 2017 13:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161988 Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935 barred the suit because the dispute concerned revenue in its ordinary sense; the validity of the underlying tax did not have to be decided first, and a bona fide challenge to assessment or demand remained within the exclusion. The suit was therefore not maintainable. Section 4(1)(c) and Explanation 3 to Section 4(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act were upheld because dividends paid outside British India were treated as having a real territorial nexus with British India where they were paid out of profits earned there. The impugned provisions were thus intra vires, and the action failed on both maintainability and merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Mar 1944 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161988