https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467730 Project subsidy received for acquisition of plant and machinery was not required to be reduced from actual cost for depreciation, as the issue had been consistently decided in the assessee's favour in earlier years. Additional depreciation was also allowed in the succeeding year where the machinery had been put to use for less than 180 days, following co-ordinate bench precedent in the assessee's own case. However, a 50% disallowance of expenditure on Mahila Netrutva Vikas Gokul Gram was sustained because the assessee failed to produce complete supporting vouchers and bills, and relied mainly on ledger extracts and self-made vouchers. en-us Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:02:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467730 Project subsidy received for acquisition of plant and machinery was not required to be reduced from actual cost for depreciation, as the issue had been consistently decided in the assessee's favour in earlier years. Additional depreciation was also allowed in the succeeding year where the machinery had been put to use for less than 180 days, following co-ordinate bench precedent in the assessee's own case. However, a 50% disallowance of expenditure on Mahila Netrutva Vikas Gokul Gram was sustained because the assessee failed to produce complete supporting vouchers and bills, and relied mainly on ledger extracts and self-made vouchers. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467730