<?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>2011 (3) TMI 1782 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280329</link>
    <description>Excess stock found during survey, where it had no separate physical identity from accounted trading stock and formed part of the same business inventory, was to be characterised as undisclosed business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B. The reasoning was that inseparable unrecorded stock in the regular course of business is properly taxed as business receipt or income, not as a distinct deemed investment. On those facts, the stock difference was rightly assessed as undisclosed business income.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2019 12:43:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1782 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280329</link>
      <description>Excess stock found during survey, where it had no separate physical identity from accounted trading stock and formed part of the same business inventory, was to be characterised as undisclosed business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B. The reasoning was that inseparable unrecorded stock in the regular course of business is properly taxed as business receipt or income, not as a distinct deemed investment. On those facts, the stock difference was rightly assessed as undisclosed business income.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>