<?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>2015 (9) TMI 1561 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193258</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to apply a 12% net profit rate on the gross receipts declared by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 &amp;amp; 2008-09. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)&#039;s order well-reasoned, considering the lack of proper financial records, nature of the business, and fabrication work carried out by the assessee. The appeals were dismissed based on the principle that valid reasons provided by the CIT(A) should be upheld in cases of estimation, which was deemed applicable in this instance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2017 08:41:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 1561 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193258</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision to apply a 12% net profit rate on the gross receipts declared by the assessee for assessment years 2007-08 &amp;amp; 2008-09. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)&#039;s order well-reasoned, considering the lack of proper financial records, nature of the business, and fabrication work carried out by the assessee. The appeals were dismissed based on the principle that valid reasons provided by the CIT(A) should be upheld in cases of estimation, which was deemed applicable in this instance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193258</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>