2000 (4) TMI 17

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding the view that the sales tax subsidy of Rs. 2,06,400 received by the assessee was a capital receipt not liable to income-tax ?" During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer (North-East) wrote a letter to the assessee dated February 20, 1989 (sic). In that letter, he claimed th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... times. Heard learned counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that now the issue is concluded by the apex court in the case of Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 228 ITR 253. He submits that sales tax subsidy received after production cannot be treated as capital receipt. The facts are not in dispute that the subsidy, i.e., in the form of refund of sales ta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X