https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289506 The expression "resident" in section 18(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was held to bear its statutory income-tax meaning, not mere physical residence, because the section must be read with the interlinked scheme of sections 42 and 43 and the Act's defined terms. The Court rejected a construction based on practical difficulty at the time of payment, holding that such difficulty cannot displace the consistent statutory meaning. It also found the writ petition maintainable, since the appeal under section 30(1A) was not an adequate alternative remedy on the facts, and observed that certiorari may lie for an error of law apparent on the face of the record, though mandamus was more appropriate. en-us Thu, 21 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Aug 2020 17:35:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289506 The expression "resident" in section 18(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was held to bear its statutory income-tax meaning, not mere physical residence, because the section must be read with the interlinked scheme of sections 42 and 43 and the Act's defined terms. The Court rejected a construction based on practical difficulty at the time of payment, holding that such difficulty cannot displace the consistent statutory meaning. It also found the writ petition maintainable, since the appeal under section 30(1A) was not an adequate alternative remedy on the facts, and observed that certiorari may lie for an error of law apparent on the face of the record, though mandamus was more appropriate. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Mar 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289506