<?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>1976 (12) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6514</link>
    <description>A provision made for tax liability after reducing the last instalment of advance tax was treated as a debt owed on the relevant valuation date for purposes of net wealth computation. The Court followed its earlier majority ruling in Assam Oil Co. and declined to reopen the issue, holding that such an estimated tax provision is deductible under section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The answer to the referred question was therefore in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=45597" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (12) TMI 5 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6514</link>
      <description>A provision made for tax liability after reducing the last instalment of advance tax was treated as a debt owed on the relevant valuation date for purposes of net wealth computation. The Court followed its earlier majority ruling in Assam Oil Co. and declined to reopen the issue, holding that such an estimated tax provision is deductible under section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The answer to the referred question was therefore in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=6514</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>