<?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>1965 (3) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174484</link>
    <description>The expression &quot;life insurance fund&quot; in paragraph 4(d) of Part B of the First Schedule to the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 is to be read with the statutory meaning given in the Insurance Act, 1938 unless the context otherwise requires. That meaning treats the fund as the separate life insurance revenue fund, not the difference between total assets and liabilities. Provisions concerning investment of assets, valuation, and surplus did not displace that interpretation, and clause (d) was directed to past surplus shown by the statutory valuation balance sheet rather than a notional aggregate surplus. The construction avoided inconsistency with the 1956 Act and unsupported commercial anomalies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2015 09:49:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (3) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174484</link>
      <description>The expression &quot;life insurance fund&quot; in paragraph 4(d) of Part B of the First Schedule to the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 is to be read with the statutory meaning given in the Insurance Act, 1938 unless the context otherwise requires. That meaning treats the fund as the separate life insurance revenue fund, not the difference between total assets and liabilities. Provisions concerning investment of assets, valuation, and surplus did not displace that interpretation, and clause (d) was directed to past surplus shown by the statutory valuation balance sheet rather than a notional aggregate surplus. The construction avoided inconsistency with the 1956 Act and unsupported commercial anomalies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>