<?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>1997 (4) TMI 8 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5596</link>
    <description>A forced transfer of shares, made without tax-avoidance motive, did not attract the proviso to section 12B(2), so market value substitution was not required. A loss on a standing guarantee given for a subsidiary became deductible only when liquidation ended and the unrecovered balance was finally ascertained; earlier liquidation recoveries were not taxable as separate income in prior years. Payments to directors of subsidiary companies were not deductible because they lacked a direct nexus with the assessee&#039;s own business and were made only to relieve the subsidiaries&#039; remuneration restriction. The appeals thus failed on all issues, with the first two points favouring the assessee and the third against it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 15:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 8 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5596</link>
      <description>A forced transfer of shares, made without tax-avoidance motive, did not attract the proviso to section 12B(2), so market value substitution was not required. A loss on a standing guarantee given for a subsidiary became deductible only when liquidation ended and the unrecovered balance was finally ascertained; earlier liquidation recoveries were not taxable as separate income in prior years. Payments to directors of subsidiary companies were not deductible because they lacked a direct nexus with the assessee&#039;s own business and were made only to relieve the subsidiaries&#039; remuneration restriction. The appeals thus failed on all issues, with the first two points favouring the assessee and the third against it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>