<?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>1967 (3) TMI 114 - HOUSE OF LORDS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192155</link>
    <description>A subvention payment under section 20 of the Finance Act 1953 was treated as deductible where the statutory conditions were met for the relevant accounting period, because the provision relates the payment back to that period. The majority held that subsections (9) and (10) serve different functions: subsection (9) defines the qualifying company class by residence and carrying on a trade, while subsection (10) requires the associated-company relationship to subsist from the start of the accounting period until payment. The recipient&#039;s cessation of trading before actual receipt did not defeat the deduction, so long as the other statutory requirements were satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 17:09:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=468913" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (3) TMI 114 - HOUSE OF LORDS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192155</link>
      <description>A subvention payment under section 20 of the Finance Act 1953 was treated as deductible where the statutory conditions were met for the relevant accounting period, because the provision relates the payment back to that period. The majority held that subsections (9) and (10) serve different functions: subsection (9) defines the qualifying company class by residence and carrying on a trade, while subsection (10) requires the associated-company relationship to subsist from the start of the accounting period until payment. The recipient&#039;s cessation of trading before actual receipt did not defeat the deduction, so long as the other statutory requirements were satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>