https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383182 Incentives received under state schemes, though computed as reimbursement of energy charges, were held to be capital receipts because the determinative test is the purpose of the subsidy, which here was to induce setting up an industrial unit in a backward region; the later insertion of s. 2(24)(xviii) by the Finance Act, 2015 was held prospective and inapplicable to the relevant AY, with the consequence that the receipts were not taxable. For MAT, since the incentives were not in the nature of "income" at all, they could not be included in book profit under s. 115JB, distinguishing SC authority dealing with exempt but taxable income; accordingly, they were excluded from book profit. The Tribunal was held empowered under s. 254 to entertain the claim based on a revised computation without a revised return, and the assessee succeeded. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 10:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383182 Incentives received under state schemes, though computed as reimbursement of energy charges, were held to be capital receipts because the determinative test is the purpose of the subsidy, which here was to induce setting up an industrial unit in a backward region; the later insertion of s. 2(24)(xviii) by the Finance Act, 2015 was held prospective and inapplicable to the relevant AY, with the consequence that the receipts were not taxable. For MAT, since the incentives were not in the nature of "income" at all, they could not be included in book profit under s. 115JB, distinguishing SC authority dealing with exempt but taxable income; accordingly, they were excluded from book profit. The Tribunal was held empowered under s. 254 to entertain the claim based on a revised computation without a revised return, and the assessee succeeded. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383182