<?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>1982 (7) TMI 177 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68957</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claim of depreciation on buses transferred to retiring partners of a firm. It held that the distribution of assets to retiring partners did not constitute a transfer under section 34(2)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as partners have mutual rights over partnership assets. The Tribunal emphasized that such distributions were not sales or transfers, as partners received their share of the capital they already owned. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the buses given to retiring partners were not discarded assets and upheld the depreciation claim, restricting it to the period they were used for business purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:06:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (7) TMI 177 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68957</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claim of depreciation on buses transferred to retiring partners of a firm. It held that the distribution of assets to retiring partners did not constitute a transfer under section 34(2)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as partners have mutual rights over partnership assets. The Tribunal emphasized that such distributions were not sales or transfers, as partners received their share of the capital they already owned. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the buses given to retiring partners were not discarded assets and upheld the depreciation claim, restricting it to the period they were used for business purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>