https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266739 The Tribunal quashed the Principal Commissioner's order under section 263, ruling in favor of the assessee. It held that the revision should have been limited to specific issues identified, not the entire assessment order. The Tribunal upheld the depreciation rates applied by the Assessing Officer for computer equipment, UPS, and SAP, citing permissible views supported by judicial precedents. Additionally, it affirmed the eligibility for additional depreciation on fire safety equipment, weigh scale, printer, and storage tank, following a decision by the Gujarat High Court. The assessment order was deemed not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. en-us Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:09:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266739 The Tribunal quashed the Principal Commissioner's order under section 263, ruling in favor of the assessee. It held that the revision should have been limited to specific issues identified, not the entire assessment order. The Tribunal upheld the depreciation rates applied by the Assessing Officer for computer equipment, UPS, and SAP, citing permissible views supported by judicial precedents. Additionally, it affirmed the eligibility for additional depreciation on fire safety equipment, weigh scale, printer, and storage tank, following a decision by the Gujarat High Court. The assessment order was deemed not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266739