<?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>1989 (11) TMI 66 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55951</link>
    <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A))&#039;s decision to delete the additions made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding the valuation of closing stock by the assessee. The ITAT emphasized the consistency of the assessee&#039;s valuation method, which had been accepted over the years. It was determined that changing the method would disrupt established practices, leading to the dismissal of all departmental appeals and confirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:49:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=94413" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (11) TMI 66 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55951</link>
      <description>The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A))&#039;s decision to delete the additions made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding the valuation of closing stock by the assessee. The ITAT emphasized the consistency of the assessee&#039;s valuation method, which had been accepted over the years. It was determined that changing the method would disrupt established practices, leading to the dismissal of all departmental appeals and confirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>