<?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>2012 (4) TMI 628 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178539</link>
    <description>The ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upheld the allowance of depreciation at 60% on computer peripherals and accessories, in line with the decision of the Delhi HC. The ITAT emphasized the integral nature of these items to computer systems, supported by various precedents, and found no contrary evidence from the Revenue to warrant a different view. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the ld. CIT(A) to allow depreciation at the rate of 60% on computer peripherals and accessories.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jul 2017 13:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415778" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 628 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178539</link>
      <description>The ITAT dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and upheld the allowance of depreciation at 60% on computer peripherals and accessories, in line with the decision of the Delhi HC. The ITAT emphasized the integral nature of these items to computer systems, supported by various precedents, and found no contrary evidence from the Revenue to warrant a different view. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision of the ld. CIT(A) to allow depreciation at the rate of 60% on computer peripherals and accessories.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>