<?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>1957 (5) TMI 42 - COURT OF APPEAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191861</link>
    <description>Controlling interest under paragraph 11 of Schedule IV to the Finance Act 1937 depends on who in fact exercises the relevant voting power, not merely on beneficial ownership or the register. Where a substantial shareholding is held by a corporate shareholder, the court may look through that body corporate to identify the person directing its votes. On the agreed facts, the corporate shareholder&#039;s votes in the company were effectively controlled by one director, who also held the directors&#039; own shares; taken together, the directors therefore controlled the company&#039;s voting power. The company was treated as a director-controlled company for profits tax purposes, and the tax authority&#039;s contrary view was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2017 10:36:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467036" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1957 (5) TMI 42 - COURT OF APPEAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191861</link>
      <description>Controlling interest under paragraph 11 of Schedule IV to the Finance Act 1937 depends on who in fact exercises the relevant voting power, not merely on beneficial ownership or the register. Where a substantial shareholding is held by a corporate shareholder, the court may look through that body corporate to identify the person directing its votes. On the agreed facts, the corporate shareholder&#039;s votes in the company were effectively controlled by one director, who also held the directors&#039; own shares; taken together, the directors therefore controlled the company&#039;s voting power. The company was treated as a director-controlled company for profits tax purposes, and the tax authority&#039;s contrary view was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 1957 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>