Court : House of Lords
Decided on : Apr-10-1963
..... must be treated as income. in commissioners of inland revenue v. blott (1921) 8 t.c.101 at page 125, lord haldane said: the company, acting with the assent so given of the shareholders, can decide conclusively what is to be done with accumulated profits. it need not pay these over to ..... character of a payment in the hands of a share-holder in this country is determined for all purposes by the legal machinery employed by the company acting under the relevant statutes (see viscount haldane in commissioners of inland revenue v. john blott, 8 t.c.101 at page 125). in ascertaining ..... ] ch.923, where the distribution of money paid out of a share premium account under the companies act. 1948, was held to have been received as capital. if, however, assets are distributed as shares in another company that is merely a distribution of money's worth instead of money and they simply represent a ..... respect of reduction of capital (or a payment out of a special premium account) or an issue of bonus shares (or it may be bonus debentures). but the respondents maintain that this case depends on the law of maryland. partial liquidation is unknown to our law. but its effect was explained ..... that according to maryland law a partial liquidation distribution was validly effected in the present case and that it resulted in the receipt by the company, lazard investment company ltd. (incorporated and carrying on business in england), of the 666 rds common shares in bestwall in respect of which income tax is .....Tag this Judgment!