Capital subsidy and section 14A principles: investment-linked subsidy is capital receipt, and no 14A disallowance applies without exempt income.

A subsidy linked to fixed capital investment under the Haryana sales tax incentive scheme was treated as a capital receipt because the scheme's object was to promote industrial investment and meet capital outlay, not to supplement trading income; depreciation was therefore allowable on the reduced cost of the fixed assets. Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D was held unsustainable where no exempt dividend income was earned in the relevant years, as the statutory condition for invoking that provision did not arise. The assessee succeeded on both issues, and the departmental challenge failed in consequence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether sales tax subsidy received under the Haryana sales tax incentive scheme was capital receipt or revenue receipt. (ii) Whether disallowance under section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 could be made when no exempt dividend income was earned.

Issue (i): Whether sales tax subsidy received under the Haryana sales tax incentive scheme was capital receipt or revenue receipt.

Analysis: The subsidy was linked to fixed capital investment and was available for a specified period up to a fixed monetary limit. Applying the purpose test, the decisive factor was the object of the scheme, namely to promote industrial investment in backward areas and contribute to capital outlay, rather than to supplement trading receipts. The assessee had consistently treated the subsidy as capital receipt by reducing it from the cost of fixed assets, and that treatment had been accepted in earlier years. The revenue authorities did not show any reason to disturb that consistent treatment.

Conclusion: The subsidy was held to be capital receipt. The assessee succeeded on this issue and depreciation was to be allowed on the reduced cost of fixed assets.

Issue (ii): Whether disallowance under section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 could be made when no exempt dividend income was earned.

Analysis: No exempt dividend income had been earned in the relevant assessment years. In the absence of exempt income, and without any finding that the expenditure claimed was not genuine, the condition for invoking section 14A did not arise. The jurisdictional High Court view relied upon required deletion of such disallowance in these circumstances.

Conclusion: The disallowance under section 14A was not sustainable. The assessee succeeded on this issue as well.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's appeals were allowed on the substantive issues, while the departmental appeal failed in consequence of the findings recorded on those issues.

Ratio Decidendi: A subsidy linked to capital investment and fixed capital outlay is capital in nature under the purpose test, and no disallowance under section 14A can be made where no exempt income is earned in the relevant year.

---