<?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>2011 (10) TMI 657 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182391</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the purchase of sand, emphasizing bank transactions and dismissing the assessing officer&#039;s concerns. However, the Court set aside the tribunal&#039;s findings on the manufacturing of Ready Mix Cement (RMC), directing a re-examination to determine if the RMC was sold to third parties or used for construction projects. The eligibility for additional depreciation hinged on this clarification, with the tribunal instructed to assess the impact of both scenarios. The Court favored a thorough examination before ruling on the claim for additional depreciation, partially supporting the Revenue&#039;s stance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2017 11:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427532" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 657 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182391</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the purchase of sand, emphasizing bank transactions and dismissing the assessing officer&#039;s concerns. However, the Court set aside the tribunal&#039;s findings on the manufacturing of Ready Mix Cement (RMC), directing a re-examination to determine if the RMC was sold to third parties or used for construction projects. The eligibility for additional depreciation hinged on this clarification, with the tribunal instructed to assess the impact of both scenarios. The Court favored a thorough examination before ruling on the claim for additional depreciation, partially supporting the Revenue&#039;s stance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>