https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327560 The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the appellant, setting aside the findings of the CIT(A) and directing the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of additional depreciation on plant and machinery. The Tribunal emphasized that eligibility for claiming depreciation should be based on the date of installation rather than the date of acquisition, supporting the appellant's entitlement to the additional depreciation claim. The appellant's argument that the delay in installation was justified due to damaged machinery being replaced by the vendor was accepted, resulting in the deletion of the earlier disallowance of the depreciation amount. en-us Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 May 2016 09:01:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327560 The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the appellant, setting aside the findings of the CIT(A) and directing the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of additional depreciation on plant and machinery. The Tribunal emphasized that eligibility for claiming depreciation should be based on the date of installation rather than the date of acquisition, supporting the appellant's entitlement to the additional depreciation claim. The appellant's argument that the delay in installation was justified due to damaged machinery being replaced by the vendor was accepted, resulting in the deletion of the earlier disallowance of the depreciation amount. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327560