The respondent, a Hindu undivided family, was carrying on various businesses in the erstwhile State of Gwalior, and one of them wa~ its ernployment as the ecretry, Treasurer and Managing Agent of a limited company. The respondent held a maJority of the issued shar-Cs in the company. For the accounting period July I, 1944, to October 16, 1944, the War Profits Tax Officer, by his assessment order dated Ju1y 9, 1951, included in its assessable profits the sum received by the respondent on July 5, 1944, as the dividend declare and paid by the company on its shares. The respondent claimed that the said sum could not be included in ·its taxab_le profits on the ground that it did not deal in shares and. that its holdings in the company were purely in the_ natuft- of investinents having no connection with its business as defined s. 2(5) of the Ordinance Gwalior War Profits Ordinance and that the business of the Secretaris, Treasurers and . M<'.l.nag;ing Agent of the company which was cacried on by it did not require any holding of the s_hareS of the co1npany and was not dependent n its investment, in the said cc'mpany. The High Court or Madhya Pradesh took the view (I) that on a proper construction ofthe _provisions of the Ordinancr, unless the acquisition o_f the oSha·res wtts an adventure in the nature of trade or the-respoUdet \V"as a.· dealer in_ shares such that the shares held by -it W·t""re part of its stock in t:t; _the income derived therefrom by \Vay of dividends could ri.Of'oJ~~~:.cl:ia_racterised as profits from business, and (2) that Soh. I of tfi··et!Jinance which
