<?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>2009 (10) TMI 505 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96479</link>
    <description>HC held that expenditure incurred by the assessee for shared facilities with NTPC was revenue in nature, and its deferment over five years was merely an accounting method; the AO could not disallow the claim when the assessee aligned its accounting with ICAI guidelines. The earlier practice of allowing the expenditure at depreciation rates was erroneous, and correction thereof could not prejudice the assessee. HC also upheld the ITAT&#039;s admission of additional grounds under s. 254, noting that they related to the same assessment year and all necessary facts were on record. On depreciation, HC held that once PSL equipment had entered the block of assets and the block was used, depreciation was allowable, answering the question against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2025 16:52:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 505 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96479</link>
      <description>HC held that expenditure incurred by the assessee for shared facilities with NTPC was revenue in nature, and its deferment over five years was merely an accounting method; the AO could not disallow the claim when the assessee aligned its accounting with ICAI guidelines. The earlier practice of allowing the expenditure at depreciation rates was erroneous, and correction thereof could not prejudice the assessee. HC also upheld the ITAT&#039;s admission of additional grounds under s. 254, noting that they related to the same assessment year and all necessary facts were on record. On depreciation, HC held that once PSL equipment had entered the block of assets and the block was used, depreciation was allowable, answering the question against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96479</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>