« Top Headlines » Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs  ITR Filing 2025: These individuals are exempt from paying tax. Do they need to file returns?  Full List Of Trump's Reciprocal Tariffs Announced Wednesday  Top 5 tax-saving investment options for salaried individuals to consider before March 31, 2025  5 lesser lesser-known avenues of tax saving you can use to save income tax before March 31, 2025  March 15 is deadline for last advance tax installment: Know if you must pay «  Revisiting Coz Law Amendment Bill... People scramble to file tax-returns... » SC refuses to stay AS-22 July, 31st 2007 The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay accounting standard AS-22 though it admitted the petitions of some corporate houses challenging this new norm issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India on deferred tax liability of listed companies. A bench comprising Justice SH Kapadia and Justice BS Reddy observed that the norms would continue to be in operation after Solicitor General GE Vahanvati appearing for Centre opposed the petitions saying AS-22 had come into effect in 2001. Counsel P Dayal appearing for the Institute of Charted Accountants of India also opposed stay on the new accounting method saying that it was envisaged after much thought. Simplex Infrastructure, First Leasing Company of India and Association of Leasing and Financing Services Companies had sought quashing of AS-22 on the ground of it being ultra vires. Under AS-22, a company became liable to provide for deferred tax liability on the first day the company accounted for its income in accordance with the AS-22 even when there was no certainty. The petitioner companies through its counsels submitted that deferred tax liability was a notional liability that can be charged to the profit and loss account (PLA). Deferred tax liability arises when a firm underpays its taxes due to a difference between how it accounts for an asset on its book versus how it accounts for it on tax basis. Earlier, the Calcutta High Court had upheld AS-22 which had brought in a new concept called deferred taxation. The court while upholding it had observed that deferred tax liability was not a notional tax liability but a real liability because it would result in future cash outflow in the form of tax payment to the tax recovering authority.