<?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>1979 (1) TMI 196 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99649</link>
    <description>A company in liquidation was held not liable to super profits tax where the statutory charging scheme depended on a computable standard deduction linked to share capital and reserves. The court reasoned that, after liquidation, the liquidator held a single undifferentiated fund and the company&#039;s capital structure could not be broken into separate components for the Second Schedule computation. As the Act did not expressly authorise such notional disintegration, the standard deduction could not be ascertained in the manner required for assessment. The reference was answered for the assessee, and the proposed super profits tax assessment was not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:03:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (1) TMI 196 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99649</link>
      <description>A company in liquidation was held not liable to super profits tax where the statutory charging scheme depended on a computable standard deduction linked to share capital and reserves. The court reasoned that, after liquidation, the liquidator held a single undifferentiated fund and the company&#039;s capital structure could not be broken into separate components for the Second Schedule computation. As the Act did not expressly authorise such notional disintegration, the standard deduction could not be ascertained in the manner required for assessment. The reference was answered for the assessee, and the proposed super profits tax assessment was not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99649</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>