The assessee claimed depreciation on assets which it had purchased and leased out. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, treating the transactions as mere financial arrangements and not genuine leases, a view which was upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, however, deleted the disallowance. Upholding the order of the Tribunal, the High Court held that for a claim under section 32, the twin conditions of ownership of the asset and its use for the purposes of the business must be satisfied. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in I.C.D.S. Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 212 Taxman 550 / 350 ITR 527 /  255 CTR 449 (SC) the Court affirmed that leasing out an asset constitutes its use for the assessee’s business, and it is not necessary for the assessee to physically use the asset itself. Since the assessee was the owner of the assets and its business was leasing, it was entitled to the depreciation claimed. Referred  CIT v. Apollo Finvest (I) Ltd (2017) 79 taxmann.com 390/(2016) 382 ITR 33 (Bom)(HC). and West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. v. Joint CIT [2006] 100 TTJ 833 (Mum)(Trib) (AY. 1994-95 to 1997-98)