<?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>1996 (6) TMI 83 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18421</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, upholding the allowance of depreciation on assets not actively used in business operations. The Court adopted a broader interpretation of the term &quot;used&quot; under the Income-tax Act, stating that even passive use of assets could justify claiming full depreciation. The decision favored the assessee, allowing depreciation claims for assets that were not actively utilized throughout the year.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:32:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57421" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 83 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18421</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, upholding the allowance of depreciation on assets not actively used in business operations. The Court adopted a broader interpretation of the term &quot;used&quot; under the Income-tax Act, stating that even passive use of assets could justify claiming full depreciation. The decision favored the assessee, allowing depreciation claims for assets that were not actively utilized throughout the year.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>