<?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>Assessing Officer&#039;s Disallowance of Depreciation Claim on Leased Assets Not Penalized u/s 271(1)(c) Due to Oversight.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=31362</link>
    <description>Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on financed leased assets - AO while disallowing the claim of depreciation has not considered the exclusion of the principle component of the lease rental clearly shows that the penal provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be attracted in this case - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:22:18 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:22:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=442620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing Officer&#039;s Disallowance of Depreciation Claim on Leased Assets Not Penalized u/s 271(1)(c) Due to Oversight.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=31362</link>
      <description>Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Claim of depreciation on financed leased assets - AO while disallowing the claim of depreciation has not considered the exclusion of the principle component of the lease rental clearly shows that the penal provisions of Section 271(1)(c) of the Act cannot be attracted in this case - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2016 12:22:18 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=31362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>