https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61667 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 30 lakhs treated as a revenue receipt by the AO for the assessment year 1995-96. The subsidy received was deemed capital in nature, intended for setting up the industry and covering capital expenditure, aligning with the decision in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. The Tribunal found that the subsidy was granted for capital purposes under a government scheme promoting agro-based industries, distinguishing it from a revenue receipt. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the capital nature of the subsidy. en-us Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:02:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61667 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs. 30 lakhs treated as a revenue receipt by the AO for the assessment year 1995-96. The subsidy received was deemed capital in nature, intended for setting up the industry and covering capital expenditure, aligning with the decision in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. The Tribunal found that the subsidy was granted for capital purposes under a government scheme promoting agro-based industries, distinguishing it from a revenue receipt. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the capital nature of the subsidy. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61667