<?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>2023 (7) TMI 1417 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314445</link>
    <description>ITAT Delhi allowed assessee&#039;s claim for 25% depreciation on rights to build and operate toll road under BOT arrangement, treating it as intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii). Court held that while Government retains ownership of immovable property, assessee&#039;s contractual right to operate project and collect tolls constitutes a license qualifying as intangible asset eligible for depreciation. AO&#039;s restriction to 7.41% depreciation was overturned. Additionally, ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of disallowance regarding warranty period expense provisions, recognizing contractual liability for project maintenance during warranty period under matching principle. Revenue&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:44:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 1417 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314445</link>
      <description>ITAT Delhi allowed assessee&#039;s claim for 25% depreciation on rights to build and operate toll road under BOT arrangement, treating it as intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii). Court held that while Government retains ownership of immovable property, assessee&#039;s contractual right to operate project and collect tolls constitutes a license qualifying as intangible asset eligible for depreciation. AO&#039;s restriction to 7.41% depreciation was overturned. Additionally, ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of disallowance regarding warranty period expense provisions, recognizing contractual liability for project maintenance during warranty period under matching principle. Revenue&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>