<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1354 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272983</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision regarding the treatment of trade deposits as income, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The core issue was whether trade deposits should be considered as income, with the Tribunal finding in favor of the assessee based on the business operations and accounting method followed. The Revenue&#039;s challenge was unsuccessful as they failed to provide evidence to counter the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2018 16:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1354 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272983</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision regarding the treatment of trade deposits as income, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The core issue was whether trade deposits should be considered as income, with the Tribunal finding in favor of the assessee based on the business operations and accounting method followed. The Revenue&#039;s challenge was unsuccessful as they failed to provide evidence to counter the CIT(A)&#039;s findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>