9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (2) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee, having not been assessed to super-tax for the assessment year 1958-59, the unabsorbed reduction in rebate under clause (i)(a) of the second proviso to Paragraph D of Part II of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1957, could not be set off against the rebate available to the assessee under the Finance Act, 1059, and that accordingly the Income-tax Officer was not justified in reducing the rebate of Rs. 16,114 available to the assessee for the assessment year 1959-60 ? " Following its earlier decision in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Deoria Sugar Mills Ltd., the High Court answered that question in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by that decision the Commissioner of Incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... absorbed reduction in rebate exhausted itself and could not be further set off against the rebate available for the assessment year 1959-60. This contention was rejected by the Income-tax Officer. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the decision of the Income-tax Officer but on a further appeal being taken to the Tribunal, the Tribunal accepted the contention of the assessee and, thereafter, at the instance of the Commissioner, the question formulated above was referred to the High Court. As mentioned earlier, the High Court has answered that question in favour of the assessee. We may now read the relevant provisions of the Finance Act, 1959. They are found in Paragraph D of Part 11 of the First Schedule to the Finan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iii) a rebate at the rate of 40% on so much of the total income as consists of dividends from a subsidiary Indian company and a rebate at the rate of 20% on the balance of the total income shall be allowed in the case of any company not entitled to a rebate under either of the preceeding clauses : Provided further that. (i) the amount of the rebate under clause (i) or clause (ii) shall be reduced by the sum, if any, equal to the amount or the aggregate of the amounts, as the case may be, computed as hereunder :--- (a) on that part of the aggregate of the sums arrived at in accordance with clause (i) of the second proviso to paragraph D of Part 11 of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1958 (XI of 1958), as has not been deemed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view taken by the Calcutta High Court in the case mentioned earlier. The Calcutta High Court opined in that case that the second proviso to Paragraph D of Part II of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 1959, provides that the amount of rebate to be allowed under clauses (i) and (ii) of the first proviso thereto has to be reduced to the sum, if any, equal to the amount or the aggregate of the amount, as the case may be, computed in the manner set out in the second proviso. If further observed : " Now, clause (i)(a) of the second proviso refers to the aggregate of the sums arrived at in accordance with clause (i) of the second proviso to Paragraph D of Part II of the First Schedule to the Finance Act of 1958. The aforesaid second proviso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
