<?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>1975 (12) TMI 72 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39389</link>
    <description>For wealth-tax purposes, a provision for gratuity is deductible only if it represents an actual debt owed on the valuation date. Gratuity liability under the Kerala Industrial Employees&#039; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1970 arises only when specified contingencies such as superannuation, retirement, resignation, retrenchment, discharge, dismissal, death, or total disablement occur after the qualifying period is completed. Until then, the liability is contingent and not a present debt. Applying the principle in Standard Mills, the High Court held that the statutory gratuity provision did not alter this character, so the amount was not an allowable deduction and the issue was answered against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:41:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=77935" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (12) TMI 72 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39389</link>
      <description>For wealth-tax purposes, a provision for gratuity is deductible only if it represents an actual debt owed on the valuation date. Gratuity liability under the Kerala Industrial Employees&#039; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1970 arises only when specified contingencies such as superannuation, retirement, resignation, retrenchment, discharge, dismissal, death, or total disablement occur after the qualifying period is completed. Until then, the liability is contingent and not a present debt. Applying the principle in Standard Mills, the High Court held that the statutory gratuity provision did not alter this character, so the amount was not an allowable deduction and the issue was answered against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>