<?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 (11) TMI 401 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253084</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow the assessee&#039;s claim for depreciation on roads constructed under a BOT agreement, considering the right to collect toll as an intangible asset under the IT Act. The tribunal upheld the depreciation claim, emphasizing that the entire project cost should be deductible either as amortized revenue expenditure or depreciation. The appeal was dismissed on 07.11.2014.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:21:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368706" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 401 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253084</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to allow the assessee&#039;s claim for depreciation on roads constructed under a BOT agreement, considering the right to collect toll as an intangible asset under the IT Act. The tribunal upheld the depreciation claim, emphasizing that the entire project cost should be deductible either as amortized revenue expenditure or depreciation. The appeal was dismissed on 07.11.2014.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253084</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>