<?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>1967 (10) TMI 9 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7060</link>
    <description>Depreciation was held allowable on plant and furniture owned by the assessee and used in its business, even though physical use was by a sales manager acting on its behalf; ownership, not the user&#039;s identity, was the ining test. The cost of a kiln prepared from funds set apart for the University of Bombay was also treated in substance as a monetary donation, so relief under section 15B was available. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee, with costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (10) TMI 9 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7060</link>
      <description>Depreciation was held allowable on plant and furniture owned by the assessee and used in its business, even though physical use was by a sales manager acting on its behalf; ownership, not the user&#039;s identity, was the ining test. The cost of a kiln prepared from funds set apart for the University of Bombay was also treated in substance as a monetary donation, so relief under section 15B was available. Both issues were answered in favour of the assessee, with costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>