<?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 1126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183908</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the allowability of depreciation for capital expenditure incurred by an assessee-trust under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming that the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation aligned with established legal principles and prior court rulings. The court emphasized that concerns over potential double deduction were unfounded based on consistent Division Bench judgments. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without costs, as the legal questions raised had already been settled by precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:56:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183908</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the allowability of depreciation for capital expenditure incurred by an assessee-trust under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming that the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation aligned with established legal principles and prior court rulings. The court emphasized that concerns over potential double deduction were unfounded based on consistent Division Bench judgments. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without costs, as the legal questions raised had already been settled by precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>