Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT

228 ITR 253Supreme Court of India1997#166 most cited

What is Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A subsidy is treated as a revenue receipt if the assessee is free to use the money in its business as it likes and is not obligated to spend it for a specific capital purpose, such as acquiring assets or repaying loans.

429

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT · subsidy revenue receipt · capital receipt · taxability of subsidies · Section 2(24)(xviii) · Section 37(1) · purpose of subsidy · obligation to spend · income tax treatment of subsidies

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 14ASection 2(24)(xviii)Section 37(1)Section 32Section 43(1)Section 147

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(xviii)section 43(1)section 40(a)(ii)book profitsdeduction under section 80iablock of assetssection 80hhcadditional depreciationwritten down valuesection 139(5)section 80hhsection 2(24)

Judgments citing Sahney Steel and Press Works Ltd. v. CIT

Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot vs. M/S Ajanta Mfg. Ltd., Morbi

In the result this issue is decided against the revenue and accordingly ground no

ITA 138/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal(1) I.T.A. No.102/Rjt/2021 (2) I.T.A. No.138/Rjt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) (1) Dcit, M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Circle-1(1), Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 Vs. (2) Acit M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Pvt. Circle1(1), Ltd., Rajkot Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 [Pan No.Aaeca6115B] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Citdr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CITDR
Section 115J

…ction 115JB of the Act, the net profit as per profit and loss account did not include sales-tax (VAT) benefit of the Rs.26,07,13,225/-. Accordingly, the AO, Sawhney following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahni Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253, added the aforesaid sales-tax benefit to the assessee’s total income. Further, the AO also re-computed book profits of the ITA Nos.102&138/Rjt/2021 DCIT vs. M/s. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Asst.Years –2015-16&2016-17 assessee company by including sales-tax (VAT) benefit of the Rs. 26,07,13, 225/- therein. 5. In appeal, Ld. CIT(Appeals) allowed…

Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1), Rajkot vs. M/S Ajanta Mfg. Ltd., Morbi

In the result this issue is decided against the revenue and accordingly ground no

ITA 102/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal(1) I.T.A. No.102/Rjt/2021 (2) I.T.A. No.138/Rjt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2016-17) (1) Dcit, M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Circle-1(1), Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 Vs. (2) Acit M/S. Ajanta Manufacturing Pvt. Circle1(1), Ltd., Rajkot Orpat Industrial Estate, Rajkot Morbi Highway, Morbi-363641 [Pan No.Aaeca6115B] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant By : Shri Vimal Desai, A.R. Respondent By: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Citdr Date Of Hearing 25.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CITDR
Section 115J

…ction 115JB of the Act, the net profit as per profit and loss account did not include sales-tax (VAT) benefit of the Rs.26,07,13,225/-. Accordingly, the AO, Sawhney following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahni Steel and Press Works Ltd 228 ITR 253, added the aforesaid sales-tax benefit to the assessee’s total income. Further, the AO also re-computed book profits of the ITA Nos.102&138/Rjt/2021 DCIT vs. M/s. Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Asst.Years –2015-16&2016-17 assessee company by including sales-tax (VAT) benefit of the Rs. 26,07,13, 225/- therein. 5. In appeal, Ld. CIT(Appeals) allowed…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Bsl Limited, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1924/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…de in the additional ground for treating the interest subsidy received under TUFS as capital receipt was also challenged by the Assessing Officer by relying mainly on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Limited [228 ITR 253]. The Id. CIT(Appeals), however, found that the issue raised by the assessee-company in the additional ground was squarely covered in favour of the assessee on merit by the decision of the Kolkata Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT -vs- M/s. Gloster Jute Mills Limited (ITA No. 766/KOL/2010 dated 02.07.2014), BSL Ltd. wherein the interest subsidy r…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Bsl Limited, Bhilwara

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1923/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…de in the additional ground for treating the interest subsidy received under TUFS as capital receipt was also challenged by the Assessing Officer by relying mainly on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Limited [228 ITR 253]. The Id. CIT(Appeals), however, found that the issue raised by the assessee-company in the additional ground was squarely covered in favour of the assessee on merit by the decision of the Kolkata Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT -vs- M/s. Gloster Jute Mills Limited (ITA No. 766/KOL/2010 dated 02.07.2014), BSL Ltd. wherein the interest subsidy r…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Maral Overseas Ltd, West Nirmar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1922/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2015-16
Section 132Section 14A

…e tax Act, 1961, it is important to understand the objects of scheme under which subsidy has been granted. Thelegal position to this effect stems from concurrent decisions of Supreme Court right from Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997) 94 Taxman 368/228 ITR 253 (SC) to CIT v. Ponni Sugars 8s Chemicals Ltd. [20081 174 Taxman 87 /306 ITR 392(SC) DCIT Vs. Maral Overseas Ltd. and to the latest decision in the case of CIT(A) v. Chaphalkar Brothers Pune / [2018] 400 ITR 279 (SC) wherein the PURPOSE TEST was held to be ultimate test to decide the character of subsidy in the hands of the assessee. The relevant…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Maral Overseas Ltd, West Nirmar

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1921/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2023AY 2014-15
Section 132Section 14A

…e tax Act, 1961, it is important to understand the objects of scheme under which subsidy has been granted. Thelegal position to this effect stems from concurrent decisions of Supreme Court right from Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997) 94 Taxman 368/228 ITR 253 (SC) to CIT v. Ponni Sugars 8s Chemicals Ltd. [20081 174 Taxman 87 /306 ITR 392(SC) DCIT Vs. Maral Overseas Ltd. and to the latest decision in the case of CIT(A) v. Chaphalkar Brothers Pune / [2018] 400 ITR 279 (SC) wherein the PURPOSE TEST was held to be ultimate test to decide the character of subsidy in the hands of the assessee. The relevant…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1116/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1115/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1114/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1113/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range - 1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as well as revenue’s appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1048/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Srihari Kutsa, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 2Section 3

…in cases where subsidy is received from Governments to Government managed corporations/bodies with a specific direction as to the purpose of such subsidy, the said subsidies are held to be out of realms of taxation (Ref: Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd v. CIT 228 ITR 253 (SC), ClT v. Ponni Sugar and Chemical Limited 306 ITR 392 (SC) & Bihar Agricultural Produce Marketing Board v. CIT 205 Taxman 378 (Patna). Therefore, since the impugned amount of Rs.50 crores is a loan which is repayable in the future, the question of treating the same as income does not arise at all. 6.4 The ld A.R. submitted that the above sub…

Welspun Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3890/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…ls Ltd vs CIT, reported in ITA.No,3890&4364/5063&5483/5165&5043/5166&5044/Mum/2016 M/s. Welspun Corp Ltd, Mumbai. [2008] 306 ITR 392 after referring to the earlier decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel Works Ltd v CIT, reported in [1999] 228 ITR 253, held that the ―purpose for which subsidy is given is the crucial factor‖. The purpose is to be judged from the character of the receipts in the hands of the assessee which has to be determined with respect to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. The point of time is not relevant and also the source and the form of subsidy is immaterial. I…

ACIT Ltu 1 Chennai, Chennai vs. Wheels India Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1697/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 14ASection 35

…r revenue in nature depending upon purposes for which said subsidy was given. In our considered view, this controversy can be resolved if we apply test laid down in the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253). The importance of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case lies in the fact that it has discussed and analyzed the entire case laws on the issue and it has laid down basic test to be applied in judging the character of subsidy. That test is the character of receipt in the hands of the assessee has to be determined with respect to th…

ACIT Ltu 1 Chennai, Chennai vs. Wheels India Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1696/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 14ASection 35

…r revenue in nature depending upon purposes for which said subsidy was given. In our considered view, this controversy can be resolved if we apply test laid down in the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253). The importance of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case lies in the fact that it has discussed and analyzed the entire case laws on the issue and it has laid down basic test to be applied in judging the character of subsidy. That test is the character of receipt in the hands of the assessee has to be determined with respect to th…

Wheels India Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Umit-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1605/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 14ASection 35

…r revenue in nature depending upon purposes for which said subsidy was given. In our considered view, this controversy can be resolved if we apply test laid down in the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253). The importance of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case lies in the fact that it has discussed and analyzed the entire case laws on the issue and it has laid down basic test to be applied in judging the character of subsidy. That test is the character of receipt in the hands of the assessee has to be determined with respect to th…

Wheels India Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Large Tax Payer Umit-1, Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1604/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1604 & 1605/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri. S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 14ASection 35

…r revenue in nature depending upon purposes for which said subsidy was given. In our considered view, this controversy can be resolved if we apply test laid down in the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahney Steel & Press Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253). The importance of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case lies in the fact that it has discussed and analyzed the entire case laws on the issue and it has laid down basic test to be applied in judging the character of subsidy. That test is the character of receipt in the hands of the assessee has to be determined with respect to th…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…, Department has raised the following grievance: “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, Id. CIT(A) right in deleting the addition made even though Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahany Steel & Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253) held that refund of sales tax is a revenue receipt?” 10. On identical issue in Assessee’s appeal, in the Ground No.3, following issue is raised: Ground No, 3: Denial of claim of exclusion of Sales tax Incentive as Capital Receipt of Rs. 3,18.24.957/-): On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…, Department has raised the following grievance: “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, Id. CIT(A) right in deleting the addition made even though Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahany Steel & Press Works Limited Vs. CIT (228 ITR 253) held that refund of sales tax is a revenue receipt?” 42. Similar issue was considered by us in the Department Appeal Ground no 5 in AY 2005-06 and held as under: “32.Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. On this issue, coordinate bench in the case of Ambuja Cement Limited in ITA No 5883/Mum/2012 & 5927/Mum/2012 (A.Y.2…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3176/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 55A

…her, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, Id. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition made in respect of the Tikaria Unit and New Wadi Unit even though Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahany Steel & Press Works Limited Vs.CIT (228 ITR 253) held that refund of sales tax is a revenue receipt?” 50. On identical issue in Assessee’s appeal, in the Ground No.3 & 10, following issue is raised: “Ground No. 3 : Denial of claim of exclusion of Sales tax Incentive (Rs.1,97,39,836) a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action…