<?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>2000 (11) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5824</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that the amount paid for deferred annuity policies by managing directors of a public limited company formed part of their remuneration chargeable under the head &#039;Salaries&#039;. The Court rejected the argument that the resolutions postponed the accrual of income, concluding that the commission accrued to the directors and was then utilized for annuity policies as per the resolutions. The Court set aside previous judgments, ruling in favor of the Revenue and allowing the civil appeals with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44907" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 1 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5824</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that the amount paid for deferred annuity policies by managing directors of a public limited company formed part of their remuneration chargeable under the head &#039;Salaries&#039;. The Court rejected the argument that the resolutions postponed the accrual of income, concluding that the commission accrued to the directors and was then utilized for annuity policies as per the resolutions. The Court set aside previous judgments, ruling in favor of the Revenue and allowing the civil appeals with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>