https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442280 The appellant's claim regarding the treatment of sales tax subsidy/incentive as a capital receipt under the Income Tax Act was partially allowed by the Tribunal, emphasizing the necessity of incriminating material for reopening assessments in unabated years. The disallowance under section 14A without incriminating material was found incorrect by the Tribunal, directing the assessing officer to compute the disallowance differently. The charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234D was partially allowed by the Tribunal, stressing the significance of incriminating material for reopening assessments in unabated years. en-us Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Aug 2023 08:18:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442280 The appellant's claim regarding the treatment of sales tax subsidy/incentive as a capital receipt under the Income Tax Act was partially allowed by the Tribunal, emphasizing the necessity of incriminating material for reopening assessments in unabated years. The disallowance under section 14A without incriminating material was found incorrect by the Tribunal, directing the assessing officer to compute the disallowance differently. The charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234D was partially allowed by the Tribunal, stressing the significance of incriminating material for reopening assessments in unabated years. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442280