<?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>1999 (7) TMI 46 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15771</link>
    <description>Horses used for stock-breeding are not treated as &quot;plant&quot; under section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because the statutory definition was retrospectively amended by the Finance Act, 1995 to exclude livestock from that expression. As a result, depreciation under section 32 is not allowable on such horses, even where they are used in the assessee&#039;s breeding business.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:06:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (7) TMI 46 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15771</link>
      <description>Horses used for stock-breeding are not treated as &quot;plant&quot; under section 43(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because the statutory definition was retrospectively amended by the Finance Act, 1995 to exclude livestock from that expression. As a result, depreciation under section 32 is not allowable on such horses, even where they are used in the assessee&#039;s breeding business.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>