<?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>1980 (7) TMI 92 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36591</link>
    <description>The High Court affirmed that assets purchased for scientific research qualify for depreciation allowances under section 32 in years other than the year of purchase. The Court rejected the argument of double relief, clarifying that depreciation allowance is not subject to other deductions under the Act. The decision upheld the entitlement of the assessee to claim depreciation for such assets even in subsequent years. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:51:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (7) TMI 92 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36591</link>
      <description>The High Court affirmed that assets purchased for scientific research qualify for depreciation allowances under section 32 in years other than the year of purchase. The Court rejected the argument of double relief, clarifying that depreciation allowance is not subject to other deductions under the Act. The decision upheld the entitlement of the assessee to claim depreciation for such assets even in subsequent years. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36591</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>