<?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>1997 (9) TMI 639 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282317</link>
    <description>An assessee that has consistently accounted for interest on a loan under the mercantile system cannot unilaterally switch to the cash system for the same transaction in a later year. A change in accounting treatment for a settled item requires mutual consent, and where no such consent is shown, the earlier method continues to govern. The High Court therefore answered the question against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2019 14:34:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=582149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 639 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282317</link>
      <description>An assessee that has consistently accounted for interest on a loan under the mercantile system cannot unilaterally switch to the cash system for the same transaction in a later year. A change in accounting treatment for a settled item requires mutual consent, and where no such consent is shown, the earlier method continues to govern. The High Court therefore answered the question against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282317</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>