<?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>1963 (5) TMI 64 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178064</link>
    <description>In computing depreciation, the income-tax authority may go behind the conveyance and examine whether the stated asset values reflect the true cost. Documentary recitals in a sale deed are not conclusive where surrounding circumstances indicate that the declared price is not real. On the facts, the authority could inspect the vendor&#039;s accounts, written down values, the lack of reliable evidence for the machinery valuation, and the nature of the transaction, and could treat part of the consideration as goodwill while reappraising the machinery value. The authority was therefore competent to fix its own valuation, and the issue was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:58:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=414330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (5) TMI 64 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178064</link>
      <description>In computing depreciation, the income-tax authority may go behind the conveyance and examine whether the stated asset values reflect the true cost. Documentary recitals in a sale deed are not conclusive where surrounding circumstances indicate that the declared price is not real. On the facts, the authority could inspect the vendor&#039;s accounts, written down values, the lack of reliable evidence for the machinery valuation, and the nature of the transaction, and could treat part of the consideration as goodwill while reappraising the machinery value. The authority was therefore competent to fix its own valuation, and the issue was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178064</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>