<?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>2025 (4) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769180</link>
    <description>The Madras HC ruled in favor of the assessee regarding interim dividend taxation and assessment reopening. The court held that interim dividend declared on 14.03.2002 during FY 2001-2002 was exempt under Section 10(33) read with Section 115(o), as the right to receive dividend accrued when unconditionally made available to shareholders, despite actual payment occurring on 23.04.2002 in FY 2002-2003. The court emphasized that accrual determines the assessment year, not receipt date. Additionally, the reassessment under Section 147 was invalid as the AO lacked tangible material showing income escapement, following SC precedent in Kelvinator of India. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 08:41:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=815982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769180</link>
      <description>The Madras HC ruled in favor of the assessee regarding interim dividend taxation and assessment reopening. The court held that interim dividend declared on 14.03.2002 during FY 2001-2002 was exempt under Section 10(33) read with Section 115(o), as the right to receive dividend accrued when unconditionally made available to shareholders, despite actual payment occurring on 23.04.2002 in FY 2002-2003. The court emphasized that accrual determines the assessment year, not receipt date. Additionally, the reassessment under Section 147 was invalid as the AO lacked tangible material showing income escapement, following SC precedent in Kelvinator of India. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>