<?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>2022 (7) TMI 1613 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465441</link>
    <description>Whether capital subsidy received for setting up hydro power units must be reduced from the &quot;actual cost&quot; of plant and machinery for computing depreciation under the Act was disputed, the AO holding that depreciation was allowable only on adjusted WDV after reducing the subsidy. The ITAT held that the character and depreciation impact of the same subsidy had arisen in earlier AYs and was pending adjudication at the appellate level; consistency required that the determination in those earlier AYs govern AY 2014-15. The matter was remitted to the CIT(A) to decide afresh in accordance with law by applying, mutatis mutandis, the findings in the prior AYs; the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:22:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=873611" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1613 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465441</link>
      <description>Whether capital subsidy received for setting up hydro power units must be reduced from the &quot;actual cost&quot; of plant and machinery for computing depreciation under the Act was disputed, the AO holding that depreciation was allowable only on adjusted WDV after reducing the subsidy. The ITAT held that the character and depreciation impact of the same subsidy had arisen in earlier AYs and was pending adjudication at the appellate level; consistency required that the determination in those earlier AYs govern AY 2014-15. The matter was remitted to the CIT(A) to decide afresh in accordance with law by applying, mutatis mutandis, the findings in the prior AYs; the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465441</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>