<?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>2003 (9) TMI 813 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292444</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow 40% depreciation on a truck used for business operations, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s application. The Court emphasized that income from hiring the truck justified the higher depreciation rate, regardless of the primary business activity, distinguishing the case from previous rulings. The judgment clarified that the truck&#039;s income source, even if not the primary business, supported the higher depreciation rate, concluding that no legal question arose in allowing the 40% depreciation rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2020 11:58:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 813 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292444</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow 40% depreciation on a truck used for business operations, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s application. The Court emphasized that income from hiring the truck justified the higher depreciation rate, regardless of the primary business activity, distinguishing the case from previous rulings. The judgment clarified that the truck&#039;s income source, even if not the primary business, supported the higher depreciation rate, concluding that no legal question arose in allowing the 40% depreciation rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>