Clarification on case law

HI All

I have not understood the below case law,

CIT Vs Yamaha Motor India

"(Would the phrase " used for purpose of business" in respect of discarded machine include use of such assiet in the earlier year for claim of depreciation).

 

kindly explain with example.

Thanks in advance

Replies (1)

It means that whether the machine was being used in the earlier years for the purpose of the business, as depreciation can be claimed only if the machine is being used wholly for the purpose of carrying on the business.  if it was used in the earlier other than the purpose of the business then the depreciation claim would be disallowed.

Therefore in the above case, the said phrase is being used.

Leave a Reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Company
Featured 21 September 2026
Consultant - Reporting

Finrep Advisors LLP

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
16 September 2026
Internal Audit - Team Lead

Consulting & Beyond

Chennai

CA

View Details
Company
22 September 2026
Account Assistant

Chirag P Shah & Co. Chartered Accountant

Pune

B.Com

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 28 September 2026
Junior Accountant

J S P M & Associates LLP

Pune

B.Com

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 15 September 2026
Freelance Taxation Content Writer Intern

Interactive Media Pvt Ltd.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
08 September 2026
Audit Executive

Thammana & Associates

Srikakulam

B.Com

View Details
Company
19 September 2026
CA/Semi-CA/BCom

Pravin Sarvaiya

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
15 September 2026
Client-site CA associate

Aditya Muley and Co

Mumbai

CA

View Details