<?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>2012 (9) TMI 734 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216926</link>
    <description>The case involved issues such as disallowance of transport and octroi charges, wages, valuation of closing stock, labor charges, and inflated purchases. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal for A.Y. 2005-06, reducing disallowances and deletions based on lack of concrete evidence. For A.Y. 2006-07, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, noting that payments were made before the year-end, aligning with the decision in Merilyn Shipping.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 734 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216926</link>
      <description>The case involved issues such as disallowance of transport and octroi charges, wages, valuation of closing stock, labor charges, and inflated purchases. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal for A.Y. 2005-06, reducing disallowances and deletions based on lack of concrete evidence. For A.Y. 2006-07, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, noting that payments were made before the year-end, aligning with the decision in Merilyn Shipping.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216926</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>