<?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>1962 (4) TMI 105 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183148</link>
    <description>Available surplus for profit bonus in a registered firm must be computed on a notional tax basis linked to the partners&#039; share of firm income, not by treating the firm like a company or by adding registered-firm tax again, which would amount to double deduction. The Tribunal&#039;s fixation of partners&#039; remuneration was not disturbed because the challenge rested on unreliable evidence and the record did not justify substituting a fresh estimate. Customary Diwali bonus was treated as proved where the payment was long-standing, uniform, and festival-linked; proof of a year of loss was not treated as an inflexible prerequisite where the payment was not shown to be a mere ex gratia bounty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 May 2016 17:47:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430064" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (4) TMI 105 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183148</link>
      <description>Available surplus for profit bonus in a registered firm must be computed on a notional tax basis linked to the partners&#039; share of firm income, not by treating the firm like a company or by adding registered-firm tax again, which would amount to double deduction. The Tribunal&#039;s fixation of partners&#039; remuneration was not disturbed because the challenge rested on unreliable evidence and the record did not justify substituting a fresh estimate. Customary Diwali bonus was treated as proved where the payment was long-standing, uniform, and festival-linked; proof of a year of loss was not treated as an inflexible prerequisite where the payment was not shown to be a mere ex gratia bounty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>