https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3390 HC held that gas cylinders and spindles qualify as "plant" under s.43(3) and were entitled to 100% depreciation under s.32(1)(ii) as per the proviso then in force. Conversely, the court upheld the revenue on disallowance of provident fund-related payments under s.43B, finding the unamended provision did not permit deduction for contributions made after the statutory due date and that the subsequent omission of the proviso (by later finance legislation) could not be given retrospective effect to allow deduction for the assessment year in dispute. en-us Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3390 HC held that gas cylinders and spindles qualify as "plant" under s.43(3) and were entitled to 100% depreciation under s.32(1)(ii) as per the proviso then in force. Conversely, the court upheld the revenue on disallowance of provident fund-related payments under s.43B, finding the unamended provision did not permit deduction for contributions made after the statutory due date and that the subsequent omission of the proviso (by later finance legislation) could not be given retrospective effect to allow deduction for the assessment year in dispute. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3390