https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21669 The High Court of Madras held that the subsidy received from SIPCOT did not reduce the actual cost of plant and machinery for depreciation and development rebate, following the precedent set in Srinivas Industries v. CIT [1991] 188 ITR 22. The ruling favored the taxpayer, with no costs awarded. en-us Tue, 22 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:43:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21669 The High Court of Madras held that the subsidy received from SIPCOT did not reduce the actual cost of plant and machinery for depreciation and development rebate, following the precedent set in Srinivas Industries v. CIT [1991] 188 ITR 22. The ruling favored the taxpayer, with no costs awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21669