<?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>1987 (7) TMI 19 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24822</link>
    <description>For capital computation under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, an appropriation that is in substance a contingency reserve or similar reserve is treated as a reserve and included in capital. The Calcutta High Court noted that this position had already been settled by earlier decisions following the Supreme Court, so no further substantial question of law arose. On that basis, the request for a certificate to appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:03:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=63820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (7) TMI 19 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24822</link>
      <description>For capital computation under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, an appropriation that is in substance a contingency reserve or similar reserve is treated as a reserve and included in capital. The Calcutta High Court noted that this position had already been settled by earlier decisions following the Supreme Court, so no further substantial question of law arose. On that basis, the request for a certificate to appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24822</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>