https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183925 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the capital subsidy should not be reduced from the cost of machinery for depreciation calculation. Additionally, the subsidy received as excise duty reimbursement was not considered a revenue receipt and should not be added to the income for tax purposes. The Tribunal concluded that the AO was not justified in including these items in the book profit calculation under section 115JB. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Ld CIT(A) on all three issues. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jun 2016 10:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183925 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the capital subsidy should not be reduced from the cost of machinery for depreciation calculation. Additionally, the subsidy received as excise duty reimbursement was not considered a revenue receipt and should not be added to the income for tax purposes. The Tribunal concluded that the AO was not justified in including these items in the book profit calculation under section 115JB. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed, affirming the decision of the Ld CIT(A) on all three issues. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183925