https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291767 A non-resident shareholder was not chargeable on dividends declared, paid and received in England by sterling companies, because the income did not in fact accrue or arise in British India and the statutory deeming rule could not extend the tax territorially. The civil suit challenging the levy was not barred by the Income-tax Act's remedial machinery or exclusion clause, since those provisions did not cover a challenge to the constitutional validity of the charging provision itself. Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935 did not exclude original jurisdiction, because an unlawful exaction is not revenue. Explanation (3) to Section 4(1)(c) was therefore ultra vires and ineffective against foreign dividend income. en-us Fri, 09 Apr 1943 00:00:00 +0630 Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:30:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291767 A non-resident shareholder was not chargeable on dividends declared, paid and received in England by sterling companies, because the income did not in fact accrue or arise in British India and the statutory deeming rule could not extend the tax territorially. The civil suit challenging the levy was not barred by the Income-tax Act's remedial machinery or exclusion clause, since those provisions did not cover a challenge to the constitutional validity of the charging provision itself. Section 226 of the Government of India Act, 1935 did not exclude original jurisdiction, because an unlawful exaction is not revenue. Explanation (3) to Section 4(1)(c) was therefore ultra vires and ineffective against foreign dividend income. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 09 Apr 1943 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291767