<?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>1945 (3) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289255</link>
    <description>Depreciation under Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was confined to buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by the assessee. Expenditure incurred for replacing consumers&#039; fans, radios and other equipment during conversion of an electricity supply system from direct current to alternating current did not relate to the assessee&#039;s own assets. Although the outlay was connected with the working of the system and was treated as capital in nature, that did not satisfy the statutory requirement of ownership. Depreciation was therefore not allowable on the replacement expenditure, and the reference was answered against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 1945 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:33:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=618136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1945 (3) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289255</link>
      <description>Depreciation under Section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was confined to buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by the assessee. Expenditure incurred for replacing consumers&#039; fans, radios and other equipment during conversion of an electricity supply system from direct current to alternating current did not relate to the assessee&#039;s own assets. Although the outlay was connected with the working of the system and was treated as capital in nature, that did not satisfy the statutory requirement of ownership. Depreciation was therefore not allowable on the replacement expenditure, and the reference was answered against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 1945 00:00:00 +0630</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>