<?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>1984 (10) TMI 80 - ITAT BOMBAY-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59281</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision in a case concerning the valuation of closing stock of distribution rights for unsold territories for the assessment year 1978-79. The dispute revolved around the application of Rule 9A of the IT Rules, 1962, to determine the value of unsold distribution rights in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Andhra Pradesh. The Tribunal recognized the practical challenges in applying Rule 9A percentages to unsaleable rights, emphasizing the discretionary nature of the rules and the need for a true and fair representation of the business&#039;s financial position. Consequently, the Department&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Dec 2010 16:03:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=97734" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (10) TMI 80 - ITAT BOMBAY-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59281</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision in a case concerning the valuation of closing stock of distribution rights for unsold territories for the assessment year 1978-79. The dispute revolved around the application of Rule 9A of the IT Rules, 1962, to determine the value of unsold distribution rights in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Andhra Pradesh. The Tribunal recognized the practical challenges in applying Rule 9A percentages to unsaleable rights, emphasizing the discretionary nature of the rules and the need for a true and fair representation of the business&#039;s financial position. Consequently, the Department&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59281</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>