<?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>2013 (9) TMI 198 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236765</link>
    <description>Purchases supported by quantitative records, accepted sales, unchanged stock tallies, and improved yield or profit figures are treated as broadly genuine, so supplier-side irregularities may justify only a limited disallowance for possible inflation in purchase price rather than rejection of the entire claim. Unutilized MODVAT/CENVAT credit was not added back. Expenditure incurred to convert an existing DG set from HSD to furnace oil, without creating a new asset or increasing capacity, was allowed as revenue expenditure in the nature of current repairs. Purchases from another supplier were not disallowed as bogus where the corresponding sales and delivery evidence were accepted. Futures losses backed by stock and actual delivery contracts were held to be hedging losses, not speculative losses.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2013 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199172" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 198 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236765</link>
      <description>Purchases supported by quantitative records, accepted sales, unchanged stock tallies, and improved yield or profit figures are treated as broadly genuine, so supplier-side irregularities may justify only a limited disallowance for possible inflation in purchase price rather than rejection of the entire claim. Unutilized MODVAT/CENVAT credit was not added back. Expenditure incurred to convert an existing DG set from HSD to furnace oil, without creating a new asset or increasing capacity, was allowed as revenue expenditure in the nature of current repairs. Purchases from another supplier were not disallowed as bogus where the corresponding sales and delivery evidence were accepted. Futures losses backed by stock and actual delivery contracts were held to be hedging losses, not speculative losses.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236765</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>