<?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>1994 (2) TMI 5 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18534</link>
    <description>The High Court considered whether an Assessing Officer had ignored opening stock while making additions for undervaluation of closing stock, so as to raise a referable question of law under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On the assessment records, the officer had accepted the opening balance from the profit and loss account, made additions only for the discrepancy in closing stock valuation, and the subsequent year&#039;s opening balance reflected the earlier enhancement. As the assessee&#039;s cost method of valuation was also followed by the officer, the claim that opening stock was ignored was unsupported. No question of law arose for reference, and the application was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:26:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 5 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18534</link>
      <description>The High Court considered whether an Assessing Officer had ignored opening stock while making additions for undervaluation of closing stock, so as to raise a referable question of law under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On the assessment records, the officer had accepted the opening balance from the profit and loss account, made additions only for the discrepancy in closing stock valuation, and the subsequent year&#039;s opening balance reflected the earlier enhancement. As the assessee&#039;s cost method of valuation was also followed by the officer, the claim that opening stock was ignored was unsupported. No question of law arose for reference, and the application was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18534</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>