Blue Star Ltd. v. DCIT

13 SOT 25Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#8727 most cited

What is Blue Star Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Consideration received for the transfer of marketing or distribution rights can be treated as revenue receipt, taxable as business income, especially where the income-earning apparatus is not destroyed and the assessee's income is not significantly reduced.

12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Blue Star Ltd v DCIT · 13 SOT 25 · ITAT · consideration for transfer of marketing rights · revenue receipt · business income · section 28(ii)(c)

Issues it is cited on

section 14bsection 10(33)section 40a(7)section 28(iv)wholly and exclusively for businesssection 43b(b)section 36(2)going concernbusiness expediencysection 36(1)(vii)section 40(a)(i)specified authority

Judgments citing Blue Star Ltd. v. DCIT

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhi Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 2067/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhi Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 2066/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1783/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1782/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Vadodara

ITA 1594/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1291/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1)(1), Baroda

ITA 1290/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1773/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The ACIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 1772/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…the Act following his appellate order no. CAB-1/05/2014-15, dated 10.3.2015, para 15.12 to 15.25, of previous AY 2001-02. 5.2 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in relying upon decision of Hon. Mumbai ITAT in case of Blue Star Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 13 SOT 25, in his appellate order of previous AY 2001-02, justifying his stand that consideration received for transfer of marketing / distribution rights is revenue receipt, in as much as facts involved in that case are distinctly different from the facts in the given case. 5.3 That CIT(A) has grievously erred in fact and in law in not appreciating that th…

Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1, Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assesse and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1771/AHD/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT D.R
Section 14BSection 35DSection 37Section 40A(9)Section 43Section 43B

…sideration, Rs.7 Crores would estimate as consideration against trademark and remaining is for the relinquishment of right to manufacture and transfer of goodwill. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the case laws relied by the CIT(A) in the case of relied Blue Star, 13 SOT 25 is distinguishable and does not apply in assessee’s case. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the case law reported by the CIT(A) is very much identical to assessee’s case as there is no destruction of income earning apparatus because the assessee has 50% share in JV and there was no significant reduction in the income of the assessee even after the assign…

The DCIT, Baroda Circle-1, Baroda vs. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited, Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assesse and the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1762/AHD/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 May 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT D.R
Section 14BSection 35DSection 37Section 40A(9)Section 43Section 43B

…sideration, Rs.7 Crores would estimate as consideration against trademark and remaining is for the relinquishment of right to manufacture and transfer of goodwill. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the case laws relied by the CIT(A) in the case of relied Blue Star, 13 SOT 25 is distinguishable and does not apply in assessee’s case. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the case law reported by the CIT(A) is very much identical to assessee’s case as there is no destruction of income earning apparatus because the assessee has 50% share in JV and there was no significant reduction in the income of the assessee even after the assign…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6908/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

…the Ld.DR brought to our notice findings of the lower authorities and submitted that relies on the findings of the lower authorities. He further relied on the submissions filed on 27/07/2021. 1. Blue Star Ltd (2006) 8 SOT 6 (Mum)(URO) 2. Blue Star Ltd (2007) 13 SOT 25 (Mum)(URO) 3. Blue Star Ltd vs CIT (1995) 79 Taxman 281 (Bom) 4. Lyka Labs Ltd vs ACIT (2015) 60 taxmann.com 76 (Mumbai Trib) 5. DCIT vs Bayer (India) Ltd (ITAT, Mum) 7 ITR (Trib) 381 6. IIT Corporate Services Ltd vs DCIT 4 ITR (Trib) 147 7. CIT vs. Al-Kabeer Exports Ltd (2010) 193 Taxman 56 (Bom) 11 Larsen & Toubro Asstt.Yrs 2001-02 & 2001-02 14…

Blue Star Ltd. v. DCIT (13 SOT 25) — Cited in 12 Judgments | BharatTax