Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1986 (9) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... This reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is at the instance of the assessee to answer the following question of law: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of section 80M of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that deduction under section 80M should be given on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....section 80M of the Act. The assessee's further appeal to the Tribunal has also failed. The Tribunal also rejected the assessee's contention that the benefit in accordance with section 80M of the Act is to be computed on the basis of the gross dividend income instead of net dividend income. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Tribunal, the assessee sought a reference to this court which has led to t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oth Traders (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 243, by clearly providing that this benefit under section 80M was to be computed on the basis of the net dividend income and not gross dividend income. This amendment led to a challenge to its constitutional validity before the Supreme Court and the decision of the Supreme Court in that case is reported in Distributors (Baroda) P. Ltd. v. Union of ....