<?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>2010 (2) TMI 71 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75425</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision and dismissed the tax case appeal, ruling in favor of the respondent-company engaged in civil construction contracts. The assessing officer&#039;s estimation of additional income based on incomplete project method was challenged by the assessee, with both the Tribunal and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) finding no fault in the assessee&#039;s consistent use of the completed contract method of accounting. The court emphasized the assessee&#039;s freedom to choose accounting methods and rejected the revenue&#039;s attempt to enforce a specific method, citing precedent that as long as the chosen method is consistent and regular, the revenue cannot compel a change.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 71 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75425</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision and dismissed the tax case appeal, ruling in favor of the respondent-company engaged in civil construction contracts. The assessing officer&#039;s estimation of additional income based on incomplete project method was challenged by the assessee, with both the Tribunal and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) finding no fault in the assessee&#039;s consistent use of the completed contract method of accounting. The court emphasized the assessee&#039;s freedom to choose accounting methods and rejected the revenue&#039;s attempt to enforce a specific method, citing precedent that as long as the chosen method is consistent and regular, the revenue cannot compel a change.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>