<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1953 (11) TMI 13 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97265</link>
    <description>Advance income-tax demanded under section 18A was treated as part of the statutory tax-collection scheme and, once quantified by a notice of demand under section 29 and made payable under section 45, it became tax due and payable. The Court held that for winding-up priority purposes under section 230(1)(a) of the Indian Companies Act, the debt retained its character as payable tax even though final assessment and interest issues arose later. The later regular assessment did not displace the priority already attached at the date of the winding-up order. Accordingly, the claim to preferential payment was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:22:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1953 (11) TMI 13 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97265</link>
      <description>Advance income-tax demanded under section 18A was treated as part of the statutory tax-collection scheme and, once quantified by a notice of demand under section 29 and made payable under section 45, it became tax due and payable. The Court held that for winding-up priority purposes under section 230(1)(a) of the Indian Companies Act, the debt retained its character as payable tax even though final assessment and interest issues arose later. The later regular assessment did not displace the priority already attached at the date of the winding-up order. Accordingly, the claim to preferential payment was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 1953 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97265</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>