<?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>2008 (8) TMI 6 - HIGH COURT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30267</link>
    <description>HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that a provision for diminution in value of obsolete stock was justified. The assessee showed the stock had not moved for over three years, could only be sold as scrap, and sale proceeds would be lower than excise duty payable. Applying the lower-of-cost-or-net-realizable-value rule, the provision represented an anticipated diminution in value and was allowable despite the AO&#039;s rejection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2025 13:01:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68924" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 6 - HIGH COURT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30267</link>
      <description>HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s factual finding that a provision for diminution in value of obsolete stock was justified. The assessee showed the stock had not moved for over three years, could only be sold as scrap, and sale proceeds would be lower than excise duty payable. Applying the lower-of-cost-or-net-realizable-value rule, the provision represented an anticipated diminution in value and was allowable despite the AO&#039;s rejection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30267</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>