<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1642 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467287</link>
    <description>Closing stock valuation challenge concerned whether an assessing officer could disallow the taxpayer&#039;s consistent valuation method by revaluing inventory and increasing gross profit; analysis emphasises that a consistent method of accounting, supported by documentary evidence (including computerized stock records and specific reductions for third party stock, market adjustment and obsolete items), must permit real income to be deduced under Section 145 and be judged with regard to effects on subsequent assessments and rectification proceedings under Section 154. On that basis the addition was found unjustified and deleted, with the department&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 15:02:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=890366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1642 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467287</link>
      <description>Closing stock valuation challenge concerned whether an assessing officer could disallow the taxpayer&#039;s consistent valuation method by revaluing inventory and increasing gross profit; analysis emphasises that a consistent method of accounting, supported by documentary evidence (including computerized stock records and specific reductions for third party stock, market adjustment and obsolete items), must permit real income to be deduced under Section 145 and be judged with regard to effects on subsequent assessments and rectification proceedings under Section 154. On that basis the addition was found unjustified and deleted, with the department&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>