https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23743 While computing capital under rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, the capital base is not to be reduced merely because the company has obtained a deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, including section 80-I. The Bombay HC followed the binding ruling in CIT v. Century Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd. and accepted that a Chapter VI-A deduction does not require a proportionate capital reduction for surtax computation. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Dec 2009 16:59:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23743 While computing capital under rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, the capital base is not to be reduced merely because the company has obtained a deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, including section 80-I. The Bombay HC followed the binding ruling in CIT v. Century Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd. and accepted that a Chapter VI-A deduction does not require a proportionate capital reduction for surtax computation. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23743