R.S.JHAVERI & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE–1, AURANGABAD
What were the facts?
The assessee, a partnership firm, received Rs. 6 crores for relinquishing its agency business. The Assessing Officer treated this as revenue receipt and made an addition to the total income. The assessee claimed it as a capital receipt.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the issue of the nature of receipt (capital vs. revenue) was decided in favour of the assessee in a related appeal. For the disallowance of commission, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for further verification.
What were the issues?
The primary issues were the taxability of the amount received for relinquishing agency business and the allowability of commission expenses.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 28(va),Section 56,Section 50B,Section 2(42C),Section 132,Section 132(4),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 153A,Section 69,Section 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA
PER R.K. PANDA, VP:
The above 2 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 02.09.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune-12 relating to assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17 respectively. Since identical grounds have been raised in both the appeals, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of steel plates. The said firm is having agency of Dillinger GTS Ventes (DGV) which is a foreign company and the said
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 28(va)
- JCIT(OSD), Range-10, ITO C.R. Building vs Gem Agrofoods Pvt. Ltd., Shanti NiketanITA 1227/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed21 Aug 2026AY 2014-15
- R.S.Jhaveri & Co., Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2440/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed18 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- Pr Commissioner of Income Tax-2 Chandigarh vs M/S Smithkline Beecham Consumer Healthcare…ITA/325/20164 Feb 2026
- Rasar Biogenetics, Hyderabad vs ITO., Ward-10(1), HyderabadITA 1266/HYD/2025[2016-2017]Status: Disposed7 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017
- Ravi Shroff, Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4186/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: Disposed7 Nov 2025AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Jitin Batra Proprietor Of M/S. Dreamz Conference And Event Management Group vs. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii / Avato Ward 60 & Ors.Delhi · 7 Oct 2026
- Madhusudan Saraogi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue, Howrah And Kadamtala Charge And Ors.Calcutta · 7 Oct 2026
- Neeraj Massey vs. Assistant CommissionerUttarakhand · 7 Oct 2026
- Padu Paraja vs. The Commnr. Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- The Lead Factory vs. The Assistant Commissoner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 7 Oct 2026