https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6933 To claim protection under the second proviso to section 45 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, an assessee had to show that remittance of taxed income was prevented solely by a legal prohibition or restriction in the foreign jurisdiction. The Court found that the attempts to obtain permission for remittance from Ceylon were incomplete and not satisfactorily bona fide, and the correspondence with exchange control authorities did not establish with reasonable certainty that all possible steps had been taken. On that basis, the proviso could not be invoked and the assessee remained liable to be treated as in default for recovery proceedings. en-us Fri, 10 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6933 To claim protection under the second proviso to section 45 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, an assessee had to show that remittance of taxed income was prevented solely by a legal prohibition or restriction in the foreign jurisdiction. The Court found that the attempts to obtain permission for remittance from Ceylon were incomplete and not satisfactorily bona fide, and the correspondence with exchange control authorities did not establish with reasonable certainty that all possible steps had been taken. On that basis, the proviso could not be invoked and the assessee remained liable to be treated as in default for recovery proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6933