<?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>1995 (12) TMI 22 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18405</link>
    <description>A debenture redemption reserve was treated as a reserve, not a provision for a known liability, where the assessee retained an enforceable right to use the amount for business purposes until the redemption date. Applying the commercial accountancy distinction between reserve and provision in the surtax context, the amount was therefore includible in the capital base for surtax computation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:56:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 22 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18405</link>
      <description>A debenture redemption reserve was treated as a reserve, not a provision for a known liability, where the assessee retained an enforceable right to use the amount for business purposes until the redemption date. Applying the commercial accountancy distinction between reserve and provision in the surtax context, the amount was therefore includible in the capital base for surtax computation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>