<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1867 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT  </title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286377</link>
    <description>Depreciation on assets transferred through amalgamation was disallowed because the issue was covered by an earlier decision against the assessee. Share issue expenses, including advisory fees, were also disallowed as revenue expenditure under section 37, following binding Supreme Court precedent. Where deduction claims are governed adversely by binding precedent, the appellate challenge fails; no surviving question required adjudication and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 23 Feb 2020 12:46:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1867 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT  </title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286377</link>
      <description>Depreciation on assets transferred through amalgamation was disallowed because the issue was covered by an earlier decision against the assessee. Share issue expenses, including advisory fees, were also disallowed as revenue expenditure under section 37, following binding Supreme Court precedent. Where deduction claims are governed adversely by binding precedent, the appellate challenge fails; no surviving question required adjudication and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>