Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Depreciation at the higher rate for life-saving medical equipment was denied where the assessee's operation theatre, air pipeline system, anaesthesia trolley system and stabilizer were not specifically listed in the depreciation table and were not remotely identical to the notified equipment. On that basis, allowance of depreciation at 40% was treated as a mistake apparent from the record, and rectification under section 154 was upheld. The Tribunal sustained restriction of depreciation to 15% and rejected reliance on the cited High Court ruling because that case involved equipment found identical to the specified machinery, which was not the position here.
Depreciation at the higher rate for life-saving medical equipment was denied where the assessee's operation theatre, air pipeline system, anaesthesia trolley system and stabilizer were not specifically listed in the depreciation table and were not remotely identical to the notified equipment. On that basis, allowance of depreciation at 40% was treated as a mistake apparent from the record, and rectification under section 154 was upheld. The Tribunal sustained restriction of depreciation to 15% and rejected reliance on the cited High Court ruling because that case involved equipment found identical to the specified machinery, which was not the position here.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
