<?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>1973 (2) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9203</link>
    <description>In an assessment under section 23(3), the officer may reject unreliable, incomplete or false book results and estimate income on relevant material without specifically invoking the proviso to section 13, because that proviso governs defects in the accounting method rather than rejection of untrue accounts. The assessment order itself may show such rejection if its substance is clear. The estimated additions were also sustained because the claimed wastage, production figures and explanations for low output were unsupported by verifiable records, while comparative production history and unexplained disparities provided sufficient material. The estimate was therefore based on evidence and not mere suspicion, and the Revenue&#039;s position was upheld on both issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=48227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (2) TMI 38 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9203</link>
      <description>In an assessment under section 23(3), the officer may reject unreliable, incomplete or false book results and estimate income on relevant material without specifically invoking the proviso to section 13, because that proviso governs defects in the accounting method rather than rejection of untrue accounts. The assessment order itself may show such rejection if its substance is clear. The estimated additions were also sustained because the claimed wastage, production figures and explanations for low output were unsupported by verifiable records, while comparative production history and unexplained disparities provided sufficient material. The estimate was therefore based on evidence and not mere suspicion, and the Revenue&#039;s position was upheld on both issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>