https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168574 Contributions received from Government to meet the cost of extending supply lines were held to be capital receipts because they were non-recurring, applied to capital expenditure, and did not form part of ordinary trading receipts or profits. Their character depended on purpose and substance, not accounting treatment, so they were not assessable as trading income. For depreciation, the entire expenditure on the new supply lines constituted the assessee's actual cost, even though part of the outlay was met by Government, and the contributions were not excluded from the cost base. The ratio is that a contribution toward capital outlay is capital in nature, while actual cost for depreciation is the full construction cost. en-us Tue, 27 Mar 1945 00:00:00 +0630 Fri, 13 Mar 2015 11:54:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168574 Contributions received from Government to meet the cost of extending supply lines were held to be capital receipts because they were non-recurring, applied to capital expenditure, and did not form part of ordinary trading receipts or profits. Their character depended on purpose and substance, not accounting treatment, so they were not assessable as trading income. For depreciation, the entire expenditure on the new supply lines constituted the assessee's actual cost, even though part of the outlay was met by Government, and the contributions were not excluded from the cost base. The ratio is that a contribution toward capital outlay is capital in nature, while actual cost for depreciation is the full construction cost. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 27 Mar 1945 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168574