<?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>1985 (6) TMI 68 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65029</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the reassessment under Section 147(a) based on non-disclosure of material facts regarding machinery usage by another entity. Section 144B was deemed applicable to pending reassessments. Depreciation and development rebate on machinery at JKCM were disallowed. The addition to closing stock was deleted. The objection to interest levy was rejected. The excess dividend tax levy was upheld. Relief under Section 84 was partly granted. The addition as &#039;trading receipts&#039; was deleted. The assessee&#039;s appeal was partly allowed, providing relief on the closing stock addition, while the department&#039;s appeal succeeded on the legal issue of reassessment scope.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:36:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (6) TMI 68 - ITAT DELHI-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65029</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the reassessment under Section 147(a) based on non-disclosure of material facts regarding machinery usage by another entity. Section 144B was deemed applicable to pending reassessments. Depreciation and development rebate on machinery at JKCM were disallowed. The addition to closing stock was deleted. The objection to interest levy was rejected. The excess dividend tax levy was upheld. Relief under Section 84 was partly granted. The addition as &#039;trading receipts&#039; was deleted. The assessee&#039;s appeal was partly allowed, providing relief on the closing stock addition, while the department&#039;s appeal succeeded on the legal issue of reassessment scope.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65029</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>