<?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>2001 (3) TMI 257 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68480</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the entire expenditure on repairs and maintenance to furniture and fixture as revenue expenditure, overturning the AO&#039;s decision to treat part of it as capital expenditure due to lack of evidence. The Tribunal upheld the treatment of expenditures on replacement of cables as capital expenditures, citing insufficient evidence of replacement. The Tribunal also directed the AO to delete the disallowance of miscellaneous expenses and allowed higher depreciation on imported and Indian cars used for hire, based on their regular use. However, the Tribunal upheld the lower depreciation rates on motor boats, woollen rugs, and carpets, rejecting the assessee&#039;s claims. The issue of professional charges paid to architects was remanded to the AO for further verification, while the disallowance of expenditure on sponsoring a cricket match was upheld due to lack of evidence of a business purpose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 16:11:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106876" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 257 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68480</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the entire expenditure on repairs and maintenance to furniture and fixture as revenue expenditure, overturning the AO&#039;s decision to treat part of it as capital expenditure due to lack of evidence. The Tribunal upheld the treatment of expenditures on replacement of cables as capital expenditures, citing insufficient evidence of replacement. The Tribunal also directed the AO to delete the disallowance of miscellaneous expenses and allowed higher depreciation on imported and Indian cars used for hire, based on their regular use. However, the Tribunal upheld the lower depreciation rates on motor boats, woollen rugs, and carpets, rejecting the assessee&#039;s claims. The issue of professional charges paid to architects was remanded to the AO for further verification, while the disallowance of expenditure on sponsoring a cricket match was upheld due to lack of evidence of a business purpose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>