<?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>1964 (4) TMI 7 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49366</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, concluding that the Income-tax Officer was not bound by the assessee&#039;s choice of the cash system of accounting and could add the value of the stock-in-trade at the end of the year. The Court emphasized the importance of considering the stock-in-trade in computing taxable income for an accurate assessment of profits. The Commissioner was entitled to costs in both the Supreme Court and the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (4) TMI 7 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49366</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, concluding that the Income-tax Officer was not bound by the assessee&#039;s choice of the cash system of accounting and could add the value of the stock-in-trade at the end of the year. The Court emphasized the importance of considering the stock-in-trade in computing taxable income for an accurate assessment of profits. The Commissioner was entitled to costs in both the Supreme Court and the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>