<?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>1988 (11) TMI 39 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24276</link>
    <description>For surtax computation under the Second Schedule, reserves for doubtful debts and bonus were not includible in capital employed, as only amounts recognised within the statutory scheme can form the capital base. Deductions allowed under sections 80G and 80M were also not treated as sums not includible in total income for rule 4 purposes, because the surtax framework did not permit their exclusion in that manner. The article states that both questions were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63274" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (11) TMI 39 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24276</link>
      <description>For surtax computation under the Second Schedule, reserves for doubtful debts and bonus were not includible in capital employed, as only amounts recognised within the statutory scheme can form the capital base. Deductions allowed under sections 80G and 80M were also not treated as sums not includible in total income for rule 4 purposes, because the surtax framework did not permit their exclusion in that manner. The article states that both questions were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24276</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>