<?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>2021 (10) TMI 121 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413069</link>
    <description>Motor lorries and tankers used in a transport business were treated as vehicles used in a business of running them on hire, so the assessee qualified for higher depreciation under the relevant depreciation entry in Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The Court followed its earlier decision involving the same assessee and applied that position to the present claim. The Revenue&#039;s contrary view was rejected, and the higher depreciation rate of 30% was held allowable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Oct 2021 13:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657545" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 121 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413069</link>
      <description>Motor lorries and tankers used in a transport business were treated as vehicles used in a business of running them on hire, so the assessee qualified for higher depreciation under the relevant depreciation entry in Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The Court followed its earlier decision involving the same assessee and applied that position to the present claim. The Revenue&#039;s contrary view was rejected, and the higher depreciation rate of 30% was held allowable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>