https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292702 The one-month limit for requiring a tax reference under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as mandatory, and an assessee could not bypass that remedy by invoking section 66(3) or section 45 of the Specific Relief Act after failing to act in time. The presumption that remittances from a foreign business received in British India are profits was held rebuttable, and on the admitted facts the remittances were found to be return of capital rather than taxable foreign profits. The reference thus succeeded only in part. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 1930 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jan 2021 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292702 The one-month limit for requiring a tax reference under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was treated as mandatory, and an assessee could not bypass that remedy by invoking section 66(3) or section 45 of the Specific Relief Act after failing to act in time. The presumption that remittances from a foreign business received in British India are profits was held rebuttable, and on the admitted facts the remittances were found to be return of capital rather than taxable foreign profits. The reference thus succeeded only in part. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Jan 1930 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292702