<?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>1978 (2) TMI 3 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28498</link>
    <description>The computation of tax liability under Section 23A had to be made on the income finally upheld, not on an addition later reduced on appeal. Because only part of the alleged undisclosed loans survived and the balance was deleted, the Tribunal&#039;s assumption that the entire addition remained was incorrect. The distributable surplus and the validity of the Section 23A order could be examined only after applying the correct tax liability. The Tribunal was therefore directed to reconsider the matter on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:13:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=67495" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (2) TMI 3 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28498</link>
      <description>The computation of tax liability under Section 23A had to be made on the income finally upheld, not on an addition later reduced on appeal. Because only part of the alleged undisclosed loans survived and the balance was deleted, the Tribunal&#039;s assumption that the entire addition remained was incorrect. The distributable surplus and the validity of the Section 23A order could be examined only after applying the correct tax liability. The Tribunal was therefore directed to reconsider the matter on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>