<?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>2023 (7) TMI 1471 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457941</link>
    <description>Additions for advance from customers and for provision for warranty were treated as covered by binding Supreme Court authority, including Taparia Tools and Rotork Controls, so the assessee&#039;s treatment was accepted on both issues. The note records that the proposed questions of law were already settled in favour of the assessee, and therefore no substantial question of law arose for consideration. On that basis, no interference was called for with the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:24:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771241" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 1471 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457941</link>
      <description>Additions for advance from customers and for provision for warranty were treated as covered by binding Supreme Court authority, including Taparia Tools and Rotork Controls, so the assessee&#039;s treatment was accepted on both issues. The note records that the proposed questions of law were already settled in favour of the assessee, and therefore no substantial question of law arose for consideration. On that basis, no interference was called for with the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457941</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>