https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68345 Central investment subsidy was held not to reduce the actual cost or written down value of assets for depreciation purposes. The Tribunal applied the settled depreciation principle that such subsidy does not form a deduction from asset cost, and it held that a later ruling on whether subsidy is revenue or capital receipt did not alter that position. The assessee's claim to depreciation without reducing the subsidy from the asset base was upheld. en-us Tue, 05 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:46:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68345 Central investment subsidy was held not to reduce the actual cost or written down value of assets for depreciation purposes. The Tribunal applied the settled depreciation principle that such subsidy does not form a deduction from asset cost, and it held that a later ruling on whether subsidy is revenue or capital receipt did not alter that position. The assessee's claim to depreciation without reducing the subsidy from the asset base was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68345