<?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>1992 (1) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5358</link>
    <description>For depreciation under the Income-tax Act, 1961, actual cost and written down value must be computed year by year under the statutory formula, including assets acquired before the Act where no saving provision preserves the earlier basis. The definition of written down value requires the Assessing Officer to deduct depreciation actually allowed in prior years, and section 43(1) also permits reduction of cost by amounts met by others. The provision was treated as prospective in its operation because it governs future depreciation calculations, not reopening of past assessments. The language of the statute and the suggested anomalies did not justify confining recomputation to assets acquired in the relevant previous year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2026 11:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=44441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (1) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5358</link>
      <description>For depreciation under the Income-tax Act, 1961, actual cost and written down value must be computed year by year under the statutory formula, including assets acquired before the Act where no saving provision preserves the earlier basis. The definition of written down value requires the Assessing Officer to deduct depreciation actually allowed in prior years, and section 43(1) also permits reduction of cost by amounts met by others. The provision was treated as prospective in its operation because it governs future depreciation calculations, not reopening of past assessments. The language of the statute and the suggested anomalies did not justify confining recomputation to assets acquired in the relevant previous year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>