DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE vs. M/S. WIPRO GE MEDICAL SYSTEMS LIMITED, BANGALORE

ITA 1020/BANG/2007Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 November 2022AY 2000-0115 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the agreement for the non-compete fee was not filed, making it difficult to ascertain the parties' intentions. Therefore, the issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer for verification and decision based on applicable law.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a non-compete fee as a revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer disallowed it, considering it a capital expenditure. The CIT(A) allowed the claim, but the High Court remanded the issue of non-compete fee to the Tribunal for further examination.

What were the issues?

Whether the non-compete fee paid by the assessee constitutes revenue or capital expenditure, and whether the agreement's terms support the claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A,Section 80HHE,Section 80IB,Section 28(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(10)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Smt. Girija G.P., Advocates, Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl

PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out of remand by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in ITA No. 1058/2008 vide order dated 02/12/2016 in an appeal filed by revenue.

2.

The Ld.AR submitted that revenue filed appeal before the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court against order dated 20/06/2008 passed by this Tribunal on following issues. 1) Reduction in claim of exemption of profits u/s. 10A. 2) Reduction in claim u/s. 80HHE.

Page 2 3) Reduction of claim u/s. 80IB 4) Disallowance of non-compete fee paid as a revenue expenditure

3.

Hon’ble High Court while dealing with the above issues framed the following questions o

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →