<?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>1996 (6) TMI 31 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17585</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order setting aside the original assessment of an assessee-firm as erroneous. The issue revolved around the valuation of closing stock at market rate during dissolution, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of market rate valuation over cost price as per the dissolution deed. The court emphasized the importance of valuing stock-in-trade at prevailing market prices for accurate trading results. The assessee&#039;s argument based on the dissolution deed specifying cost price valuation was rejected, resulting in the reference being disposed of in favor of the Revenue, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:07:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56585" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 31 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17585</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Commissioner&#039;s order setting aside the original assessment of an assessee-firm as erroneous. The issue revolved around the valuation of closing stock at market rate during dissolution, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of market rate valuation over cost price as per the dissolution deed. The court emphasized the importance of valuing stock-in-trade at prevailing market prices for accurate trading results. The assessee&#039;s argument based on the dissolution deed specifying cost price valuation was rejected, resulting in the reference being disposed of in favor of the Revenue, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>