https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253034 Depreciation under section 32 on a BOT toll road was not available where the highway vested in the Union and the concessionaire had only development, maintenance, operation and fee-collection rights, not ownership of the road itself. The note further explains that revision under section 263 was proper because the Assessing Officer allowed the claim without meaningful enquiry, making the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. The wider income-tax concept of ownership did not override the special statutory vesting of national highways. en-us Tue, 14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Feb 2025 16:34:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253034 Depreciation under section 32 on a BOT toll road was not available where the highway vested in the Union and the concessionaire had only development, maintenance, operation and fee-collection rights, not ownership of the road itself. The note further explains that revision under section 263 was proper because the Assessing Officer allowed the claim without meaningful enquiry, making the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. The wider income-tax concept of ownership did not override the special statutory vesting of national highways. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253034