<?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 (5) TMI 655 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179444</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s depreciation claim for assets acquired prior to the relevant previous year under section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, noting their usage exceeding the required 180 days. However, for assets acquired during the relevant previous year, the Tribunal directed the assessee to provide details as per the second proviso to section 32(1). Regarding the provision for bad and doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia), the Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO for verification of the banking company status during the relevant period and directed assessment of the provision&#039;s eligibility based on RBI norms. The appeal was partly allowed with directions for further assessment by the AO.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2016 18:52:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 655 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179444</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the assessee&#039;s depreciation claim for assets acquired prior to the relevant previous year under section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, noting their usage exceeding the required 180 days. However, for assets acquired during the relevant previous year, the Tribunal directed the assessee to provide details as per the second proviso to section 32(1). Regarding the provision for bad and doubtful debts under section 36(1)(viia), the Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO for verification of the banking company status during the relevant period and directed assessment of the provision&#039;s eligibility based on RBI norms. The appeal was partly allowed with directions for further assessment by the AO.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>