<?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>2006 (10) TMI 84 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3378</link>
    <description>The court upheld the decision of the Tribunal in declining to permit the production of a stock register as additional evidence during the appeal. It also supported the Tribunal&#039;s justification for sustaining an ad hoc addition of Rs.13,000 in the trading account due to the absence of the stock register and low profits. The court distinguished previous cases and concluded that the Tribunal&#039;s decisions were legally justified, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. No costs were awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 12:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 84 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3378</link>
      <description>The court upheld the decision of the Tribunal in declining to permit the production of a stock register as additional evidence during the appeal. It also supported the Tribunal&#039;s justification for sustaining an ad hoc addition of Rs.13,000 in the trading account due to the absence of the stock register and low profits. The court distinguished previous cases and concluded that the Tribunal&#039;s decisions were legally justified, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. No costs were awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>