https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364314 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, classifying the interest received on mobilization advance as capital income based on the precedent set by the Bokaro Steel Ltd. case. The court held that the interest income was integral to the construction activities and should be treated as a capital receipt rather than revenue income, overturning the Tribunal's decision that had considered it as revenue income. The court's decision aligned with the Bokaro Steel Ltd. judgment, setting aside the Tribunal's order and allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee. en-us Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:54:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364314 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, classifying the interest received on mobilization advance as capital income based on the precedent set by the Bokaro Steel Ltd. case. The court held that the interest income was integral to the construction activities and should be treated as a capital receipt rather than revenue income, overturning the Tribunal's decision that had considered it as revenue income. The court's decision aligned with the Bokaro Steel Ltd. judgment, setting aside the Tribunal's order and allowing the appeal in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364314