<?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>1945 (12) TMI 4 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185130</link>
    <description>Depreciation on buildings, machinery, plant or furniture used for business was allowable in full where the statutory conditions were met, notwithstanding part-year ownership or use. The statutory scheme specifically adjusted depreciation on sale of machinery or plant and permitted apportionment where an asset was not wholly used for business purposes, but contained no general provision for reducing depreciation solely because an asset was transferred during the accounting year. Equitable considerations could not restrict the statutory allowance. Accordingly, depreciation could not be apportioned merely because ownership or use continued for only part of the year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 1945 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 16:43:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=436980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1945 (12) TMI 4 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185130</link>
      <description>Depreciation on buildings, machinery, plant or furniture used for business was allowable in full where the statutory conditions were met, notwithstanding part-year ownership or use. The statutory scheme specifically adjusted depreciation on sale of machinery or plant and permitted apportionment where an asset was not wholly used for business purposes, but contained no general provision for reducing depreciation solely because an asset was transferred during the accounting year. Equitable considerations could not restrict the statutory allowance. Accordingly, depreciation could not be apportioned merely because ownership or use continued for only part of the year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 1945 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>