<?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>2016 (12) TMI 1085 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336440</link>
    <description>Depreciation under Section 32 is not confined to formal registered legal title where the assessee has substantial consideration, possession, and beneficial control under a lease-cum-sale arrangement. Applying Podar Cement and Mysore Minerals, the Delhi HC treated &quot;owned&quot; as covering a person who has dominion over the property, is entitled to use it in its own right, and uses it for business purposes. The Court also accepted that Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act supported the assessee&#039;s continued possession and beneficial interest. Depreciation was therefore allowable despite the absence of registered legal ownership.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2017 18:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452412" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1085 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336440</link>
      <description>Depreciation under Section 32 is not confined to formal registered legal title where the assessee has substantial consideration, possession, and beneficial control under a lease-cum-sale arrangement. Applying Podar Cement and Mysore Minerals, the Delhi HC treated &quot;owned&quot; as covering a person who has dominion over the property, is entitled to use it in its own right, and uses it for business purposes. The Court also accepted that Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act supported the assessee&#039;s continued possession and beneficial interest. Depreciation was therefore allowable despite the absence of registered legal ownership.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336440</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>