<?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 (12) TMI 1009 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175608</link>
    <description>The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)&#039;s order, allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal regarding the addition of closing Work in Progress (WIP) and emphasizing the principle of consistency in the method of accounting. The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal holding that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) were not justified in adopting a different methodology without providing a deduction for opening stock.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2015 13:36:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 1009 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175608</link>
      <description>The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)&#039;s order, allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal regarding the addition of closing Work in Progress (WIP) and emphasizing the principle of consistency in the method of accounting. The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal holding that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) were not justified in adopting a different methodology without providing a deduction for opening stock.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>