<?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>2006 (5) TMI 477 - Rajasthan High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171508</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision not to refer questions to the High Court under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961. It affirmed that the machinery was used for business purposes, supporting the allowance of depreciation and investment despite uncertainties regarding the commencement of commercial production. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual findings in determining eligibility for deductions, ultimately rejecting the reference case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:30:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=391027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 477 - Rajasthan High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171508</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision not to refer questions to the High Court under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961. It affirmed that the machinery was used for business purposes, supporting the allowance of depreciation and investment despite uncertainties regarding the commencement of commercial production. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual findings in determining eligibility for deductions, ultimately rejecting the reference case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171508</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>