<?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>1986 (4) TMI 134 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67385</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to allow 30% depreciation on the Terex pay loader, considering it as earth moving equipment used in mining. The assessee was granted additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) as the pay loader was deemed &quot;installed.&quot; However, the correct rate of depreciation on motor trucks remained unresolved, with the issue being remanded to the CIT (A) for further assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:52:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (4) TMI 134 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67385</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)&#039;s decision to allow 30% depreciation on the Terex pay loader, considering it as earth moving equipment used in mining. The assessee was granted additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) as the pay loader was deemed &quot;installed.&quot; However, the correct rate of depreciation on motor trucks remained unresolved, with the issue being remanded to the CIT (A) for further assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>