<?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 (3) TMI 32 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19708</link>
    <description>The High Court held that for the assessment year 1974-75, the raw material, Formaldehyde, should be valued at cost price for computing profits and gains under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized the importance of considering real income over notional income unless specific provisions dictate otherwise, aligning with ordinary commercial trading practices. The decision rejected the inclusion of hypothetical profits in income calculations and highlighted the need to assess true profit earned in the relevant accounting period. The subsequent amendment to section 80J, effective from April 1, 1976, mandating valuation at market value, did not apply to this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:23:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 32 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19708</link>
      <description>The High Court held that for the assessment year 1974-75, the raw material, Formaldehyde, should be valued at cost price for computing profits and gains under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized the importance of considering real income over notional income unless specific provisions dictate otherwise, aligning with ordinary commercial trading practices. The decision rejected the inclusion of hypothetical profits in income calculations and highlighted the need to assess true profit earned in the relevant accounting period. The subsequent amendment to section 80J, effective from April 1, 1976, mandating valuation at market value, did not apply to this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>