<?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>2007 (4) TMI 225 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13657</link>
    <description>For surtax capital computation, unappropriated profits shown in the United Kingdom profit and loss account were treated as part of reserves on the relevant balance-sheet date, supported by the accounting treatment and absence of a board resolution, and were therefore excluded from the capital computation. By contrast, a reserve relating to capital expenditure on scientific research was not treated as an amount actually allowed as a deduction in computing income, because a separate book entry and correspondence with expenditure did not by themselves satisfy the statutory exclusion. The first issue favoured the assessee, while the second favoured the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 18:41:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52666" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 225 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13657</link>
      <description>For surtax capital computation, unappropriated profits shown in the United Kingdom profit and loss account were treated as part of reserves on the relevant balance-sheet date, supported by the accounting treatment and absence of a board resolution, and were therefore excluded from the capital computation. By contrast, a reserve relating to capital expenditure on scientific research was not treated as an amount actually allowed as a deduction in computing income, because a separate book entry and correspondence with expenditure did not by themselves satisfy the statutory exclusion. The first issue favoured the assessee, while the second favoured the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>