<?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>2002 (8) TMI 26 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11985</link>
    <description>Whether an accrued liability to restore leased land by filling mining pits is deductible in the assessment year in which pits are dug was the dominant issue. Interpreting the lease clause requiring the lessee, as far as possible, to restore the surface land to its original condition, the HC held that the obligation to fill pits crystallizes when excavation occurs, not when restoration is actually carried out. Since the assessee followed the mercantile system, the liability accrued upon digging and the estimated restoration expenditure was allowable as a deduction in AY 1991-92. The Tribunal&#039;s disallowance was set aside, the appellate authority&#039;s view was restored, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2025 18:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (8) TMI 26 - RAJASTHAN High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11985</link>
      <description>Whether an accrued liability to restore leased land by filling mining pits is deductible in the assessment year in which pits are dug was the dominant issue. Interpreting the lease clause requiring the lessee, as far as possible, to restore the surface land to its original condition, the HC held that the obligation to fill pits crystallizes when excavation occurs, not when restoration is actually carried out. Since the assessee followed the mercantile system, the liability accrued upon digging and the estimated restoration expenditure was allowable as a deduction in AY 1991-92. The Tribunal&#039;s disallowance was set aside, the appellate authority&#039;s view was restored, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>