In the return of income, filed by the assessee for the year of amalgamation i.e assessment year 2006-07, the assesee had computed WDV, in respect of the assets transferred by the amalgamating companies by reducing the amount of deprecation ( actually allowed) in assessment year 2005- 06 in accordance with the provisions of Explanation (2) to section 43(6).  AO Officer determined the WDV of assets acquired on amalgamation after considering normal depreciation allowed on assets of two amalgamating companies and consequently, disallowed excess depreciation. CIT (A) directed the AO to allow depreciation on the increased written down value of the assets.  Tribunal held that the order of the CIT (A)  Followed CIT v. Doom Dooma India Ltd. [2009] 310 ITR 392  (SC), CIT v. Silical Metallurgic Ltd. [2010] 324 ITR 29 (Bom .) (HC) (SLP rejected  No 19054 of 2008 ,  EID Parry India’s v. CIT [2012] 209 Taxman 214 (Mad.) (HC) (AY. 2006 -07)