<?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>1978 (7) TMI 73 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37621</link>
    <description>For assets acquired before the commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the computation of written down value and actual cost for later assessment years was held to follow the 1961 Act&#039;s statutory scheme, including the definition of actual cost in section 43(1). Earlier depreciation already allowed had to be adjusted within that framework, and the argument that this produced impermissible retrospectivity was rejected. The Court also preferred a uniform interpretation of the all-India fiscal statute and did not depart from the consistent view taken by other High Courts. The reference was answered in favour of the revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:31:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (7) TMI 73 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37621</link>
      <description>For assets acquired before the commencement of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the computation of written down value and actual cost for later assessment years was held to follow the 1961 Act&#039;s statutory scheme, including the definition of actual cost in section 43(1). Earlier depreciation already allowed had to be adjusted within that framework, and the argument that this produced impermissible retrospectivity was rejected. The Court also preferred a uniform interpretation of the all-India fiscal statute and did not depart from the consistent view taken by other High Courts. The reference was answered in favour of the revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=37621</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>