<?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>2010 (8) TMI 952 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175003</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing 100% depreciation claim on steel plates and scaffolding as plant &amp;amp; machinery under Section 32. However, the Court held that the assessee engaged in building construction activities is not entitled to investment allowance under the Act, as building construction does not qualify as producing an article or thing for investment allowance eligibility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 16:23:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403947" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 952 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175003</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing 100% depreciation claim on steel plates and scaffolding as plant &amp;amp; machinery under Section 32. However, the Court held that the assessee engaged in building construction activities is not entitled to investment allowance under the Act, as building construction does not qualify as producing an article or thing for investment allowance eligibility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>