<?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>2014 (6) TMI 224 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248320</link>
    <description>Lease equalisation charges arising from recognised finance-lease accounting were held to be reflected through the profit and loss account in line with the matching principle and a true and fair view, and could not be disallowed merely on the Revenue&#039;s view where the accounts were not rejected under the accounting provisions. Bond issue expenses were treated as revenue expenditure because they were incurred to raise business finance and did not create or enlarge a capital asset. Depreciation on office premises was allowed where possession and ownership indicia under part performance were established on facts, and no perversity was shown in the factual finding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 224 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248320</link>
      <description>Lease equalisation charges arising from recognised finance-lease accounting were held to be reflected through the profit and loss account in line with the matching principle and a true and fair view, and could not be disallowed merely on the Revenue&#039;s view where the accounts were not rejected under the accounting provisions. Bond issue expenses were treated as revenue expenditure because they were incurred to raise business finance and did not create or enlarge a capital asset. Depreciation on office premises was allowed where possession and ownership indicia under part performance were established on facts, and no perversity was shown in the factual finding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>