<?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>1977 (11) TMI 42 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38166</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the term &quot;building&quot; in the Explanation to section 80J of the Income-tax Act includes both the superstructure and the land it stands on. The court rejected the interpretation that &quot;building&quot; refers only to the superstructure. The cost of the building was deemed to include the cost of the land as well. The court ruled in favor of the revenue, directing the assessee to pay the costs of the reference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:36:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76712" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (11) TMI 42 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38166</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the term &quot;building&quot; in the Explanation to section 80J of the Income-tax Act includes both the superstructure and the land it stands on. The court rejected the interpretation that &quot;building&quot; refers only to the superstructure. The cost of the building was deemed to include the cost of the land as well. The court ruled in favor of the revenue, directing the assessee to pay the costs of the reference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>