<?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>2004 (9) TMI 382 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109292</link>
    <description>A share premium account under section 78 of the Companies Act, 1956 is deemed paid-up share capital only for the limited reduction procedure under sections 100 to 105, and that fiction cannot be extended to let a banking company use it as a reserve fund or write off bad debts. Section 100 permits reduction of share capital only where authorised by the articles and otherwise lawful, while the Banking Regulation Act requires maintenance and reporting of reserve fund appropriations but does not authorise transfer of share premium for loss adjustment. The proposed minute was therefore not confirmable, because the accounting treatment was unauthorised and contrary to public interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2012 15:33:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 382 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109292</link>
      <description>A share premium account under section 78 of the Companies Act, 1956 is deemed paid-up share capital only for the limited reduction procedure under sections 100 to 105, and that fiction cannot be extended to let a banking company use it as a reserve fund or write off bad debts. Section 100 permits reduction of share capital only where authorised by the articles and otherwise lawful, while the Banking Regulation Act requires maintenance and reporting of reserve fund appropriations but does not authorise transfer of share premium for loss adjustment. The proposed minute was therefore not confirmable, because the accounting treatment was unauthorised and contrary to public interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109292</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>