« Top Headlines » Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs  Mock Test Papers Series - I & II for Students appearing in CA Foundation January 2027 Examination.  Income Tax Rules 2026: CBDT Introduces Revised Form 161 for Penalty Waiver, Clarifies Misreporting Categories and Taxpayer Relief  ITR Filing and Income Tax Audit Deadline Extended: 5 Critical Things Taxpayers Must Know  Filing Belated ITR for AY 2026-27? Know Which Losses You Can Carry Forward and Which You May Lose  CBDT Extends Tax Audit Report Deadline to October 21, ITR Filing Last Date to November 21 for AY 2026-27  CBDT Extends AY 2026-27 ITR Filing Deadline for Tax-Audit Cases: New Dates and Key Compliance Details  Foreign Assets Missing From Your ITR? Income Tax Department Opens One-Time Disclosure Window  Tax Audit Deadline September 30: Why AIS, TDS and GST Figures May Not Match Your ITR and What Taxpayers Should Do  Tax audit deadline September 30: Common mistakes taxpayers should avoid  Your ITR says ‘verified’, but the refund hasn’t arrived? 5 reasons why your money could be stuck  Missed the ITR Deadline but TDS Refund Is Due? Here’s How You Can Still Claim Your Money «  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.