TMI Blog1978 (6) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estions referred to us under s. 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "), are : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income from share and house properties was rightly assessed in the status of individual ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence covers question No. 1. Accordingly, we answer this question in the negative and in favour of the assessee. Re : question No. (2) : Certain facts have to be stated in order to appreciate the contention urged in connection with the second question which arises out of the assessment of the assessee as an individual. The assessee had realised during the relevant period, dividends amounting to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... granted relief under s. 80L also. It is contended by Sri S. R. Rajasekharamurthy, learned counsel for the department, that since the deduction under s. 57(iii) of the Act was in excess of the gross dividends, the assessee was not entitled to any relief under s. 80L also as, according to him, such relief could be granted when the gross dividends exceeded the deduction allowable under s. 57(iii) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en it is less than Rs. 3,000, to the extent of the whole of such income. It is obvious that in this case the gross total income-of the assessee includes income by way of dividends from Indian companies and that it exceeds Rs. 3,000. We are of the view that this fact itself is sufficient for claiming relief under s. 80L since we find that there is no further qualification incorporated in that secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
