<?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>1963 (9) TMI 57 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173958</link>
    <description>Regularly audited accounts may still be rejected where material shows that the income, profits and gains cannot properly be deduced from the accounting method employed. In a cotton-processing business, the absence of a day-to-day production and consumption register, together with questionable yield figures and comparative material, provided sufficient basis to doubt the correctness of the returns. Low profits alone were not enough, but the defective records and implausible disclosed yield justified resort to the proviso to section 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The proviso was therefore rightly invoked, and the issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:11:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (9) TMI 57 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173958</link>
      <description>Regularly audited accounts may still be rejected where material shows that the income, profits and gains cannot properly be deduced from the accounting method employed. In a cotton-processing business, the absence of a day-to-day production and consumption register, together with questionable yield figures and comparative material, provided sufficient basis to doubt the correctness of the returns. Low profits alone were not enough, but the defective records and implausible disclosed yield justified resort to the proviso to section 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The proviso was therefore rightly invoked, and the issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>