https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275841 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on all issues, aligning with various case laws and Supreme Court precedents. The incentive received on sugar quota was deemed a capital receipt, not part of income. Unilateral write-off of liabilities did not constitute remission under Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act. Payment of interest for capital assets was treated as revenue expenditure. Pre-operative expenses were upheld as revenue expenditure. Labour welfare expenses and depreciation on the vehicle were allowed. The appeals were dismissed in favor of the assessee, with no interference deemed necessary. en-us Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Oct 2018 09:55:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275841 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on all issues, aligning with various case laws and Supreme Court precedents. The incentive received on sugar quota was deemed a capital receipt, not part of income. Unilateral write-off of liabilities did not constitute remission under Section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act. Payment of interest for capital assets was treated as revenue expenditure. Pre-operative expenses were upheld as revenue expenditure. Labour welfare expenses and depreciation on the vehicle were allowed. The appeals were dismissed in favor of the assessee, with no interference deemed necessary. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275841