<?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>1982 (11) TMI 59 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55295</link>
    <description>A deposit made under the Companies Deposits (Surcharge of Income-tax) Scheme, 1976 was held not to amount to payment of surcharge on income-tax for deduction in computing chargeable profits under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The deposit scheme merely reduced surcharge liability to the extent of the deposit; it did not statutorily substitute the deposit for actual payment of surcharge. The deposit, carrying interest for five years, was legally distinct from an outright tax payment, and relief under the Income-tax Act did not alter the surtax computation. The gross surcharge amount was therefore not deductible, and only the net liability remained relevant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Nov 2010 12:28:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93758" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (11) TMI 59 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55295</link>
      <description>A deposit made under the Companies Deposits (Surcharge of Income-tax) Scheme, 1976 was held not to amount to payment of surcharge on income-tax for deduction in computing chargeable profits under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964. The deposit scheme merely reduced surcharge liability to the extent of the deposit; it did not statutorily substitute the deposit for actual payment of surcharge. The deposit, carrying interest for five years, was legally distinct from an outright tax payment, and relief under the Income-tax Act did not alter the surtax computation. The gross surcharge amount was therefore not deductible, and only the net liability remained relevant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>