https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20938 HC held that property in the trucks had passed to the assessee upon purchase, notwithstanding installment-based payment and non-registration of transfer under the Motor Vehicles Act. Relying on settled law, HC ruled that depreciation could not be denied merely because the vehicle continued to stand in the seller's name in the records of the registering authority. However, HC further held that the amendment enhancing depreciation on such vehicles to 40% with effect from 24 July 1980 was not retrospective. For AY 1980-81, only the pre-amendment rate of 30% applied. The Tribunal's grant of 40% depreciation was set aside, favouring Revenue. en-us Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Dec 2025 16:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20938 HC held that property in the trucks had passed to the assessee upon purchase, notwithstanding installment-based payment and non-registration of transfer under the Motor Vehicles Act. Relying on settled law, HC ruled that depreciation could not be denied merely because the vehicle continued to stand in the seller's name in the records of the registering authority. However, HC further held that the amendment enhancing depreciation on such vehicles to 40% with effect from 24 July 1980 was not retrospective. For AY 1980-81, only the pre-amendment rate of 30% applied. The Tribunal's grant of 40% depreciation was set aside, favouring Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20938