<?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>1935 (1) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179177</link>
    <description>Depreciation was held allowable on a jute press let out on rent because the asset remained the assessee&#039;s property and was commercially exploited as part of the business from which income was assessed. The allowance under Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was not restricted to cases where the owner personally worked the plant or machinery. The decisive factors were ownership of the asset and its use in the profit-making business, while the assessee&#039;s original intention to operate the press personally was irrelevant. A letting arrangement for industrial plant was treated as business use, and the lessees&#039; repair obligations did not affect the lessor&#039;s depreciation claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1935 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2020 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417242" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1935 (1) TMI 21 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179177</link>
      <description>Depreciation was held allowable on a jute press let out on rent because the asset remained the assessee&#039;s property and was commercially exploited as part of the business from which income was assessed. The allowance under Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was not restricted to cases where the owner personally worked the plant or machinery. The decisive factors were ownership of the asset and its use in the profit-making business, while the assessee&#039;s original intention to operate the press personally was irrelevant. A letting arrangement for industrial plant was treated as business use, and the lessees&#039; repair obligations did not affect the lessor&#039;s depreciation claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1935 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179177</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>