<?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>1989 (3) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22822</link>
    <description>Reserve for contingencies falls within the expression &quot;reserve&quot; for capital computation under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. Following the assessee&#039;s earlier-year decision on the same point, the Calcutta HC held that the Tribunal was justified in including the reserve for contingencies in the computation of capital for the assessment year 1975-76, resulting in a finding in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:12:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (3) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22822</link>
      <description>Reserve for contingencies falls within the expression &quot;reserve&quot; for capital computation under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. Following the assessee&#039;s earlier-year decision on the same point, the Calcutta HC held that the Tribunal was justified in including the reserve for contingencies in the computation of capital for the assessment year 1975-76, resulting in a finding in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>