https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327784 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the subsidy received by the assessee should be treated as a capital receipt, not chargeable to tax, as it was intended for fixed capital investment in setting up a new industrial unit in a backward area. However, the issue of depreciation on moulds used by the assessee was remanded back to the AO for further examination to determine the appropriate depreciation rate. en-us Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 May 2016 10:24:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327784 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the subsidy received by the assessee should be treated as a capital receipt, not chargeable to tax, as it was intended for fixed capital investment in setting up a new industrial unit in a backward area. However, the issue of depreciation on moulds used by the assessee was remanded back to the AO for further examination to determine the appropriate depreciation rate. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327784