<?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>2019 (9) TMI 544 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385776</link>
    <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting the issue of new properties&#039; business usage to the AO for verification. It upheld the disallowance of depreciation on properties let out and not used for business purposes, aligning with the provisions of Section 32 and Section 38(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasized the necessity of business usage for claiming depreciation, even within the &quot;Block of Assets&quot; framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2019 06:00:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=587072" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 544 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385776</link>
      <description>The tribunal partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remitting the issue of new properties&#039; business usage to the AO for verification. It upheld the disallowance of depreciation on properties let out and not used for business purposes, aligning with the provisions of Section 32 and Section 38(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasized the necessity of business usage for claiming depreciation, even within the &quot;Block of Assets&quot; framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>