https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10422 The court held that the assessee-company did not qualify as the owner of the building for claiming depreciation under section 32 of the Income-tax Act. The agreement between the firm and the assessee did not transfer title to the building, with the firm retaining ownership. As the assessee's right was limited to possession, not ownership, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, setting aside the Tribunal's order and restoring the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) decision. en-us Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10422 The court held that the assessee-company did not qualify as the owner of the building for claiming depreciation under section 32 of the Income-tax Act. The agreement between the firm and the assessee did not transfer title to the building, with the firm retaining ownership. As the assessee's right was limited to possession, not ownership, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, setting aside the Tribunal's order and restoring the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10422