https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15609 SIPCOT subsidy was held not to require reduction from the actual cost of machinery for depreciation purposes, following the governing Supreme Court principle on subsidy treatment. Because the assessment orders correctly allowed depreciation on the unreduced cost, they were not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On that basis, the Commissioner could not invoke revisionary jurisdiction to revise the assessments, and section 263 relief failed. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Aug 2009 13:13:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15609 SIPCOT subsidy was held not to require reduction from the actual cost of machinery for depreciation purposes, following the governing Supreme Court principle on subsidy treatment. Because the assessment orders correctly allowed depreciation on the unreduced cost, they were not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On that basis, the Commissioner could not invoke revisionary jurisdiction to revise the assessments, and section 263 relief failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 28 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15609