<?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>2008 (8) TMI 183 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32620</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s judgment and remitted the case for a fresh decision regarding the interpretation of depreciation of plant and machinery under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court failed to consider the aspect of passive user for claiming depreciation during a period of business suspension. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of a thorough analysis and prompt resolution, urging the High Court to provide a reasoned decision within six months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 183 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32620</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court set aside the High Court&#039;s judgment and remitted the case for a fresh decision regarding the interpretation of depreciation of plant and machinery under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court failed to consider the aspect of passive user for claiming depreciation during a period of business suspension. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of a thorough analysis and prompt resolution, urging the High Court to provide a reasoned decision within six months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32620</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>