<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1971 (9) TMI 4 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6277</link>
    <description>Dividends declared and paid in 1960 were treated as falling within the Finance Act, 1959 exemption because the phrase &quot;in respect of&quot; was construed broadly to include arrears of cumulative preference dividends attributable to earlier accounting years. The technical company-law rule that dividends are payable out of the profits of the year did not govern the Finance Act language. On that reading, dividends declared on or before 30 June 1960 and referable to prior assessment years were covered by section 19(4), so tax was not required to be deducted at source under section 18(3D) and (3E), and the payer was not liable to be treated as in default.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45360" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (9) TMI 4 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6277</link>
      <description>Dividends declared and paid in 1960 were treated as falling within the Finance Act, 1959 exemption because the phrase &quot;in respect of&quot; was construed broadly to include arrears of cumulative preference dividends attributable to earlier accounting years. The technical company-law rule that dividends are payable out of the profits of the year did not govern the Finance Act language. On that reading, dividends declared on or before 30 June 1960 and referable to prior assessment years were covered by section 19(4), so tax was not required to be deducted at source under section 18(3D) and (3E), and the payer was not liable to be treated as in default.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>