TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 1189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ciation of wind mills. [B] Whether in fact and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal, having held that the subsidy was not to be reduced from the cost of assets, should have held that the receipt was revenue receipt which was taxable.? So far as the Question A is concerned, it pertains to the treatment that the subsidy which the assessee received should get under the Income Tax Act. We find that this question was considered by this Court in Tax Appeal No.245 of 2010 which came to be decided by an order dated 21.06.2011. This Court upheld the view of the Tribunal by making following observations: "2. Shortly stated facts are as follows: 2.1 The assessee is engaged in generation of power by installing windmills bes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tribunal by way of impugned judgment dismissed the appeal by observing that: "9. We have carefully considered the contents of the assessment order and order of the CIT (A) and rival submissions made before us. We find that the incentive is provided for promoting generation of energy through non conventional sources to supplement the ever increasing demand of electricity. We further find that the incentive is given not to meet the cost of acquisition of wind mill. As the incentive is for promoting alternative source of energy and not to meet the cost of acquisition, it cannot be reduced from the brought forward W.D.V.The contention of the appellant that the cost of acquisition has been determined in past year and the W.D.V. has to be worke....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o a majority of the High Courts in the country is a matter for considerationbut the tensile strength of the acceptable logic in those decisions. It is aptly said that "a judge who announces a decision must be able to demonstrate that he began from recognized legal principles and reasoned in an intellectually coherent and politically neutral way to his result". In the present case, the reasoning underlying and implicit in, the conclusion reached by the majority of the High Courts cannot be said to be an unreasonable view and on a preponderance of preferability that view commends itself particularly in the context of a taxing statute. The expression "actual cost" needs to be interpreted liberally. The subsidy of the nature we are concerned wi....