<?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>2015 (4) TMI 1066 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179310</link>
    <description>The High Court addressed the treatment of a development fund received by the assessee, finding neutrality for the relevant assessment year. It considered the absence of a distinction between capital or revenue receipt for trusts under Section 12(1). The Court left open the possibility of revisiting the taxation of similar amounts in future cases. The claim for depreciation was allowed based on a previous judgment in favor of the assessee. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the assessee based on these findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2016 10:40:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417675" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1066 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179310</link>
      <description>The High Court addressed the treatment of a development fund received by the assessee, finding neutrality for the relevant assessment year. It considered the absence of a distinction between capital or revenue receipt for trusts under Section 12(1). The Court left open the possibility of revisiting the taxation of similar amounts in future cases. The claim for depreciation was allowed based on a previous judgment in favor of the assessee. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the assessee based on these findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>