<?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>2007 (7) TMI 280 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33593</link>
    <description>The court acknowledged and condoned the delay in refiling the appeal. The assessee&#039;s method of valuing closing stock using the cost method was upheld as consistent with accounting principles and past practice, leading to the removal of additions made by the Assessing Officer. The court emphasized the importance of consistency in stock valuation methods, previous acceptance by the Revenue, and adherence to accounting principles in dismissing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 280 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33593</link>
      <description>The court acknowledged and condoned the delay in refiling the appeal. The assessee&#039;s method of valuing closing stock using the cost method was upheld as consistent with accounting principles and past practice, leading to the removal of additions made by the Assessing Officer. The court emphasized the importance of consistency in stock valuation methods, previous acceptance by the Revenue, and adherence to accounting principles in dismissing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33593</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>