https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250889 Entertainment tax subsidies for multiplexes were treated as capital receipts where the scheme's purpose was to promote construction, establishment or modernization of cinema infrastructure, and they were not required to be reduced from actual cost under Explanation 10 to section 43(1) because they did not meet the cost of a specific depreciable asset. Expenditure on an abandoned multiplex expansion project was regarded as revenue expenditure, as it related to a proposed extension in the same line of business and did not create a new capital asset. The section 80IB claim for multiplex units was sent back for fresh verification of technical eligibility conditions such as built-up area and lobby requirements. en-us Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Aug 2014 08:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250889 Entertainment tax subsidies for multiplexes were treated as capital receipts where the scheme's purpose was to promote construction, establishment or modernization of cinema infrastructure, and they were not required to be reduced from actual cost under Explanation 10 to section 43(1) because they did not meet the cost of a specific depreciable asset. Expenditure on an abandoned multiplex expansion project was regarded as revenue expenditure, as it related to a proposed extension in the same line of business and did not create a new capital asset. The section 80IB claim for multiplex units was sent back for fresh verification of technical eligibility conditions such as built-up area and lobby requirements. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250889