2009 (12) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by 1. K. L. MANJUNATH J.-The respondent-assessee for the assessment year 1994-95 had received a sum of Rs. 3,73,000 as a subsidy granted by the State to encourage a hotel industry set up by the assessee. The assessee for the assessment year 1994-95 claimed the said amount of subsidy towards the capital investment, which was disallowed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this court raising the following, substantial questions of law : "(1) Whether the appellate authorities were correct in holding that the finding of the Assessing Officer that the subsidy of Rs. 3,73,000 received by the assessee from the State Government and utilised for carrying on its business cannot be treated as a revenue receipt despite the law declared by the apex court in Sahney Steel and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Therefore, he request the court to set aside the order passed by the authorities below and allow the appeal. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the assessee contends that the facts involved in the present case and the facts involved in the judgment relied upon by the Revenue are totally different. According to him, in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1977] 228 ITR 253, th....