<?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>1997 (11) TMI 55 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16519</link>
    <description>The court declined to answer the questions directly but directed the Assessing Officer to determine the payment of gratuity based on actuarial valuation to ascertain the existing liability accurately. The judgment emphasized the importance of actuarial valuation in distinguishing between contingent and existing liabilities, ensuring a fair assessment of the estate&#039;s financial obligations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:54:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55519" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (11) TMI 55 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16519</link>
      <description>The court declined to answer the questions directly but directed the Assessing Officer to determine the payment of gratuity based on actuarial valuation to ascertain the existing liability accurately. The judgment emphasized the importance of actuarial valuation in distinguishing between contingent and existing liabilities, ensuring a fair assessment of the estate&#039;s financial obligations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>