<?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 (10) TMI 24 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37525</link>
    <description>A capital redemption reserve created for redemption of preference shares was treated as a reserve, not a provision, under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The expression &quot;reserve&quot; was read in its ordinary company-law sense, and the Explanation to rule 1 excluded only items falling within current liabilities and provisions. A reserve shown under Reserves and Surplus under the Companies Act remained part of the capital base, and later appropriation during the accounting year did not change its character. The amount was therefore includible in the capital base for surtax computation, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:03:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (10) TMI 24 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37525</link>
      <description>A capital redemption reserve created for redemption of preference shares was treated as a reserve, not a provision, under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The expression &quot;reserve&quot; was read in its ordinary company-law sense, and the Explanation to rule 1 excluded only items falling within current liabilities and provisions. A reserve shown under Reserves and Surplus under the Companies Act remained part of the capital base, and later appropriation during the accounting year did not change its character. The amount was therefore includible in the capital base for surtax computation, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>