<?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>2003 (1) TMI 258 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63263</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the orders of the AO and CIT(A), denying the claim of depreciation on imported cars. It was found that the assessee did not meet the conditions under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, as the cars were not used for the business of running on hire for tourists. The rental agreements did not specify tourist use, and control of the cars remained with the lessee companies. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:45:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 258 - ITAT DELHI-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63263</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the orders of the AO and CIT(A), denying the claim of depreciation on imported cars. It was found that the assessee did not meet the conditions under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, as the cars were not used for the business of running on hire for tourists. The rental agreements did not specify tourist use, and control of the cars remained with the lessee companies. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>