https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59421 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding that the subsidy received by the assessee was capital in nature and not taxable as a revenue receipt. The Tribunal found that the subsidy was a capital incentive under the 1998 Scheme for Dispersal of Industries, intended for the growth of the industry, and not meant to supplement trade receipts or recoup revenue expenditure. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal concluded that the subsidy should be treated as a capital receipt, in line with the decision of the CIT(A). en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Dec 2010 16:00:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59421 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding that the subsidy received by the assessee was capital in nature and not taxable as a revenue receipt. The Tribunal found that the subsidy was a capital incentive under the 1998 Scheme for Dispersal of Industries, intended for the growth of the industry, and not meant to supplement trade receipts or recoup revenue expenditure. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal concluded that the subsidy should be treated as a capital receipt, in line with the decision of the CIT(A). Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=59421