<?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>2005 (10) TMI 546 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182224</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, upholding the firm&#039;s claims for investment allowance under section 32A and additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) for the computer machinery. The decision was based on previous judgments and the principle of consistency. The Court&#039;s judgment did not include any order as to costs, aligning with past decisions in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 14:21:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426783" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 546 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182224</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, upholding the firm&#039;s claims for investment allowance under section 32A and additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) for the computer machinery. The decision was based on previous judgments and the principle of consistency. The Court&#039;s judgment did not include any order as to costs, aligning with past decisions in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>