https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175519 Government subsidy paid to compensate an assessee for additional wage expenditure incurred in carrying on its sugar business was treated as a trading receipt. The payment was not a gratuitous or detached receipt; it was directly connected with the conduct of the trade and was intended to make good loss of profits arising from business expense. A receipt that compensates trading loss or supports the carrying on of business is revenue in nature, not a casual or capital receipt. The subsidy therefore fell within taxable business income and did not qualify for exemption as a casual receipt under Section 4(3)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:54:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175519 Government subsidy paid to compensate an assessee for additional wage expenditure incurred in carrying on its sugar business was treated as a trading receipt. The payment was not a gratuitous or detached receipt; it was directly connected with the conduct of the trade and was intended to make good loss of profits arising from business expense. A receipt that compensates trading loss or supports the carrying on of business is revenue in nature, not a casual or capital receipt. The subsidy therefore fell within taxable business income and did not qualify for exemption as a casual receipt under Section 4(3)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Dec 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175519