Against the order u/s. 263, the Tribunal held that, where an asset was part of block of asset which were used for business purposes and depreciation was granted on that block during previous year, depreciation could not be denied on ground that one of assets was not used by assessee in year under consideration.  Tribunal held that for purpose of claiming deduction of capital expenditure under S 35(1)(iv) read with S. 35(2) of the Act , once the expenditure is incurred is sufficient compliance, it is not necessary that such asset must be used during previous year.    AO made adjustment under S.  145A in respect of value of closing stock of assessee in earlier years, based on said working, income of assessee was required to be reduced during year under consideration and accordingly, assessee claimed deduction of certain amount. Same was allowed by AO. CIT invoked revision jurisdiction under section 263 holding that claim of deduction had not been properly examined by AO. Tribunal held that the adjustment under S.  145A was carried out in accordance with practice consistently followed by income tax department during earlier years and not by assessee. Accordingly the revision is held to be not valid. MAT credit, revision is held to be valid. (AY. 2009 -10)