https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183924 The Tribunal upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decisions on all three issues, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. It ruled that the subsidy received for expanding capacity should not reduce the WDV of Plant and Machinery for depreciation calculation. Additionally, the subsidy treated as excise duty reimbursement was considered a capital receipt under the incentive scheme. The Tribunal emphasized the limited jurisdiction of the AO in computing book profit, leading to the dismissal of the additions made under section 115JB. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jun 2016 10:08:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183924 The Tribunal upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s decisions on all three issues, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. It ruled that the subsidy received for expanding capacity should not reduce the WDV of Plant and Machinery for depreciation calculation. Additionally, the subsidy treated as excise duty reimbursement was considered a capital receipt under the incentive scheme. The Tribunal emphasized the limited jurisdiction of the AO in computing book profit, leading to the dismissal of the additions made under section 115JB. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183924