Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The grant received by the assessee towards plant and machinery and technical civil works is required to be reduced from the cost of assets for computing depreciation u/s 43(1) read with Explanation 10 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The actual cost of assets is to be determined after reducing the portion of cost met directly or indirectly by any other person or authority. The grant received is directly attributable to meet the cost of plant and machinery and technical civil works, and hence, such portion is to be deducted from the value/cost of assets eligible for depreciation. The assessee's contention that the grant should not be reduced from the cost of assets is rejected, as the language of the statute is clear and requires literal interpretation. The judgment relied upon by the assessee is distinguished based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.
The grant received by the assessee towards plant and machinery and technical civil works is required to be reduced from the cost of assets for computing depreciation u/s 43(1) read with Explanation 10 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The actual cost of assets is to be determined after reducing the portion of cost met directly or indirectly by any other person or authority. The grant received is directly attributable to meet the cost of plant and machinery and technical civil works, and hence, such portion is to be deducted from the value/cost of assets eligible for depreciation. The assessee's contention that the grant should not be reduced from the cost of assets is rejected, as the language of the statute is clear and requires literal interpretation. The judgment relied upon by the assessee is distinguished based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.