https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183927 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on all grounds, including excess depreciation claimed by the assessee, treatment of subsidy received on account of increasing installed capacity, classification of subsidy as excise duty reimbursement, and adjustments made by the assessee while calculating book profit under section 115JB. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order based on consistency and previous decisions in the assessee's case, emphasizing that capital subsidy need not be deducted from the cost of plant and machinery and subsidy received as excise duty reimbursement cannot be considered a revenue receipt. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jun 2016 10:08:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183927 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on all grounds, including excess depreciation claimed by the assessee, treatment of subsidy received on account of increasing installed capacity, classification of subsidy as excise duty reimbursement, and adjustments made by the assessee while calculating book profit under section 115JB. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order based on consistency and previous decisions in the assessee's case, emphasizing that capital subsidy need not be deducted from the cost of plant and machinery and subsidy received as excise duty reimbursement cannot be considered a revenue receipt. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183927