<?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>2001 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12876</link>
    <description>A lump-sum paid for leasehold rights was assessed for its character under the IT Act. Treating the payment as revenue expenditure, the HC held it was deductible in the assessment year in which it was incurred, and affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s allowance accordingly. On entitlement to investment allowance, the HC applied its earlier ruling that equipment used in film processing qualifies as plant and machinery for investment allowance, and held that the new colour film analyser and new colour film printing machine similarly qualified; investment allowance was therefore allowable. All referred questions were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2026 17:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51887" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 11 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12876</link>
      <description>A lump-sum paid for leasehold rights was assessed for its character under the IT Act. Treating the payment as revenue expenditure, the HC held it was deductible in the assessment year in which it was incurred, and affirmed the Tribunal&#039;s allowance accordingly. On entitlement to investment allowance, the HC applied its earlier ruling that equipment used in film processing qualifies as plant and machinery for investment allowance, and held that the new colour film analyser and new colour film printing machine similarly qualified; investment allowance was therefore allowable. All referred questions were answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>