<?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>1985 (9) TMI 53 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26564</link>
    <description>Interim dividend declared by the board of directors was held not to be dividend &quot;declared or distributed by the company&quot; for computing the relevant distributions under the Finance Act, 1968. The court construed the phrase in light of the legal character of interim dividend, noting that it is authorised by the articles and declared by directors in board meeting, not by the company in general meeting. As a board resolution does not create an enforceable debt until payment, the interim dividend could not be brought within the charging provision. The amount was therefore excluded from the computation of additional tax, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:44:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (9) TMI 53 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26564</link>
      <description>Interim dividend declared by the board of directors was held not to be dividend &quot;declared or distributed by the company&quot; for computing the relevant distributions under the Finance Act, 1968. The court construed the phrase in light of the legal character of interim dividend, noting that it is authorised by the articles and declared by directors in board meeting, not by the company in general meeting. As a board resolution does not create an enforceable debt until payment, the interim dividend could not be brought within the charging provision. The amount was therefore excluded from the computation of additional tax, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>