<?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>1998 (12) TMI 7 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5999</link>
    <description>A liability to satisfy the purchase price of plant and machinery by allotting equity shares did not amount to a debt for capital computation under section 80J. The obligation remained contingent until the shares were actually allotted, and a contingent liability was neither a debt in praesenti nor a debt in futuro. As a result, the share-allotment obligation could not be included in the capital base for section 80J purposes, and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45082" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (12) TMI 7 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5999</link>
      <description>A liability to satisfy the purchase price of plant and machinery by allotting equity shares did not amount to a debt for capital computation under section 80J. The obligation remained contingent until the shares were actually allotted, and a contingent liability was neither a debt in praesenti nor a debt in futuro. As a result, the share-allotment obligation could not be included in the capital base for section 80J purposes, and the revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>