<?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>1986 (6) TMI 71 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60353</link>
    <description>Depreciation under section 32 was treated as unavailable for an energized tubewell used in connection with house property income because the asset, though owned and used, was not used for business or profession. Interest paid for delayed municipal tax was held not deductible in computing annual value, as statutory interest for default is distinct from the municipal tax itself and falls outside the deduction for tax levied by a local authority. The grounds relating to interest under sections 139(8) and 215 were held maintainable and required adjudication on merits, so the refusal to entertain them was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2011 17:47:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=98800" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (6) TMI 71 - ITAT CALCUTTA-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60353</link>
      <description>Depreciation under section 32 was treated as unavailable for an energized tubewell used in connection with house property income because the asset, though owned and used, was not used for business or profession. Interest paid for delayed municipal tax was held not deductible in computing annual value, as statutory interest for default is distinct from the municipal tax itself and falls outside the deduction for tax levied by a local authority. The grounds relating to interest under sections 139(8) and 215 were held maintainable and required adjudication on merits, so the refusal to entertain them was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>