<?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>1973 (5) TMI 12 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9036</link>
    <description>Amounts set apart out of profits for future use constitute a reserve under rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, even where the appropriation is made after the close of the accounting year and relates back to the first day of the relevant year. On that footing, the excess provision for bonus, the excess provision for taxation beyond the actual liability, and the excess development rebate reserve were treated as reserves because they remained available for the company&#039;s business use. By contrast, the dividend provision and the amount referable to the actual income-tax liability were not reserves, as they were earmarked for specific present liabilities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=48074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (5) TMI 12 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9036</link>
      <description>Amounts set apart out of profits for future use constitute a reserve under rule 1 of the Second Schedule to the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963, even where the appropriation is made after the close of the accounting year and relates back to the first day of the relevant year. On that footing, the excess provision for bonus, the excess provision for taxation beyond the actual liability, and the excess development rebate reserve were treated as reserves because they remained available for the company&#039;s business use. By contrast, the dividend provision and the amount referable to the actual income-tax liability were not reserves, as they were earmarked for specific present liabilities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9036</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>