<?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>1998 (4) TMI 34 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15147</link>
    <description>The applicable law for an assessment year is the law in force on the first day of that year, so an amendment effective from 2 April 1983 could not apply to assessment year 1981-82 merely because the assessment was still pending. The pendency of assessment proceedings does not, by itself, extend an amended depreciation rate to an earlier year. The assessee was therefore not entitled to the amended rate for assessment year 1981-82, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:11:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54147" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 34 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15147</link>
      <description>The applicable law for an assessment year is the law in force on the first day of that year, so an amendment effective from 2 April 1983 could not apply to assessment year 1981-82 merely because the assessment was still pending. The pendency of assessment proceedings does not, by itself, extend an amended depreciation rate to an earlier year. The assessee was therefore not entitled to the amended rate for assessment year 1981-82, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15147</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>