| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1417 (SC) : (2020) 274 TAXMAN 0217 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 261 Section 28
Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Madras High Court in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [Tax Case Appeal No. 1938 of 2008, dt. 19-6-2019] : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 5743 (Mad-HC), whereby the High Court held that CIT(A) was fully justified in holding that the amount received by assessee was a capital receipt and was right in deleting the addition made by AO that amount was credited to the capital receipt account in the balance sheet and amount did not come anywhere within the inclusive definition of income as envisaged in section 2(24), therefore, appeal filed by assessee was allowed and order passed by Tribunal was set aside, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
|
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Business income - Characterization of income--Amount received towards restrictive convenant--Revenue or capital receipt
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Madras High Court in Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [Tax Case Appeal No. 1938 of 2008, dt. 19-6-2019] : 2019 TaxPub(DT) 5743 (Mad-HC), whereby the High Court held that CIT(A) was fully justified in holding that the amount received by assessee was a capital receipt and was right in deleting the addition made by AO that amount was credited to the capital receipt account in the balance sheet and amount did not come anywhere within the inclusive definition of income as envisaged in section 2(24), therefore, appeal filed by assessee was allowed and order passed by Tribunal was set aside. Held:, the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : SLP dismissed.
A.Y. :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|