Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT

333 ITR 386High Court2011#3130 most cited

What is Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Waiver of a loan taken for trading purposes is taxable under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it amounts to a remission or cessation of a trading liability.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT · section 41(1) · waiver of loan · trading purpose · remission of liability · cessation of liability · taxability

Also reported as

197 Taxmann 3949 Taxmann.com 302

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 2(24) of the Income Tax ActSection 28 of the Income Tax ActSection 41(1) of the Income Tax Act
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

waiver of loanbuyback of sharessection 28(iv)section 145(1)section 41(1)section 43asection 41section 145(2)section 35dsection 43(1)section 271(l)(c)profits and gains of business or profession

Judgments citing Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Ok Play India Ltd., Haryana vs. JCIT, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3402/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 194CSection 195Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. OK Play India Ltd. Vs. JCIT, 17-18, Roz-Ka-Meo Industrial Range-II, Estate, Tehsil Nuh, District- Gurgaon Mewat, Haryana PAN :AAACO2623G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. & Shri Lalit Mohan, CA Respondent by Ms. Pramita M. Biswa, Sr. DR Date of hearing 31.10.2019 Date of pronouncement 13.01.2020 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 31/03/2016 passed by the ld…

DCIT 1(1), Mumbai vs. Ashok Alco Chem Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our above order

ITA 847/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.847/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08) Dcit-(1)(1) M/S. Ashok Alco-Chem Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.579, Aaykar Bhavan 406, Sharda Chambers,33 Vs. Mumbai-400 020. New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-6876-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr. K. Sivaram & Sh. Sashank Dundu- Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Udaya Jakke-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05/09/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 13/11/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Dr. K. Sivaram and Sh. Sashank Dundu-For Respondent: Shri Udaya Jakke-Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263Section 41(1)

…liability. However, the assessee failed to substantiate the same by way of funds flow statement and merely relied upon figures reflected in the Balance Sheet. The Ld. AO, in terms of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in Logitronics Private Limited 333 ITR 386, opined that if the loan was taken for the purpose of capital asset, the waiver thereof would not constitute income and on the other hand, if the loan was taken for trading purposes, the waiver of the same would become income of the assessee. Since, the assessee failed to establish the said fact of utilization of loan for capital purposes, the wa…

Ispat Energy Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 2399/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhassessment Year : 2011-12 Ispat Energy Ltd., The Acit Circle 3(2), The Enclave, 5Th Floor, Mumbai Vs. New Prabhadevi Road, Phabhadevi, Mumbai 400 013. Pan Aaaci4970M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Rakesh Joshi & Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: S/Shri Awangshi Ginson &
Section 28Section 41(1)

…purchase of Plant 85 Machinery and waiver of the principal amount of loan taken, was neither covered by sec 28(iv) nor by sec 41(1). 10. The Ld AR in this regard also relied upon the Hon'ble Delhi High Court judgement in the case of Logitronics P Ltd V/c CIT 333 ITR 386 (Del) wherein it was held that, "in the context of waiver of loan amount, what follows from the reading of the aforesaid judgement is that the answer would depend upon the purpose for which the said loan was taken. If the loan was taken for acquiring the capital receipt, waiver thereof would not amount to any income liable to tax. On other hand,…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. the Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd., Noida

ITA 1911/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 27Section 43B

…ed by Court in case of Logitronics (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 197 Taxman 394 / 9 taxmann.com 302 , impugned order of Tribunal did not require any interference. 2. Loqitronics (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT r20111 9 taxmann.com 302 (Delhi)/r20111 197 Taxman 394 (Delhi)/r20111 333 ITR 386 (Delhi)/r20111 240 CTR 20 (Delhi) (Copy Enclosed) Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that taxability of waiver of loan by bank would depend upon purpose for which said loan was taken. If loan was taken for acquiring capital asset, waiver thereof would not amount to any income exigible to tax, but, on other hand, if loan was taken for trading purpose…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charanjit Singh Sarna, New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3944/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…lver Rock Trading LLC based in Dubai. In the above case, the Ld. DR relied upon the following decisions with regard to cessation of liability u/s 41(1) of I.T. Act: 1. Rollatainers Ltd. Vs CIT 2011 339 ITR 54 (Delhi) 2. Logitronics (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [2011] in 333 ITR 386 (Delhi) The Ld. DR relied upon the decision of E.N. Gopakumar Vs CIT (2016) 75 taxmann.com 215 (Kerala) with regard to validity of proceedings u/s 153A wherein following decisions were considered: • CIT V. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573/[2015l 234 Taxman 300/61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) (para 4). • CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava S…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Shri Charanjit Singh Sarna, New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3943/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 132ASection 153ASection 41(1)Section 68

…lver Rock Trading LLC based in Dubai. In the above case, the Ld. DR relied upon the following decisions with regard to cessation of liability u/s 41(1) of I.T. Act: 1. Rollatainers Ltd. Vs CIT 2011 339 ITR 54 (Delhi) 2. Logitronics (P.) Ltd. Vs CIT [2011] in 333 ITR 386 (Delhi) The Ld. DR relied upon the decision of E.N. Gopakumar Vs CIT (2016) 75 taxmann.com 215 (Kerala) with regard to validity of proceedings u/s 153A wherein following decisions were considered: • CIT V. Kabul Chawla [2016] 380 ITR 573/[2015l 234 Taxman 300/61 taxmann.com 412 (Delhi) (para 4). • CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corpn. (Nhava S…

Wasan Exports (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1630/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. D.R

…to-day business activity of the assessee. Interest is, therefore, related to the business activity and is a trading liability of the assessee. the Ld. D.R. relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Logitronics P. Ltd., vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 386 (Del.) in which it was held that “waiver of loan taken by assessee for business activity is assessable as business income under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that when no deduction claimed in respect of loan, it is not income of assessee”. The Ld. D.R, therefore, submitted that in view of the above it is seen that nature of liabil…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Wasan Esports (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1586/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. D.R

…to-day business activity of the assessee. Interest is, therefore, related to the business activity and is a trading liability of the assessee. the Ld. D.R. relied upon Judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Logitronics P. Ltd., vs. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 386 (Del.) in which it was held that “waiver of loan taken by assessee for business activity is assessable as business income under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that when no deduction claimed in respect of loan, it is not income of assessee”. The Ld. D.R, therefore, submitted that in view of the above it is seen that nature of liabil…

The DCIT, Circle -4, Ahmedabad vs. Gujarat State Financial Corporation, Gandhinagar

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1903/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1547/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gujarat State Financial Vs. ACIT, Corporation, Block No.10, Circle – 4, Sector-11, Udhoyog Bhavan, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar – 382017. I.T.A. No. 1903/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) DCIT, Vs. Gujarat State Financial Circle – 4, Corporation, Block No.10, Ahmedabad Sector-11, Udhoyog Bhavan, Gandhinagar – 382017. [PAN No. AABCG 2924 M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. F. Jain, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Anshu P…

Gujarat State Financial Corporation, Gandhinagar vs. The ACIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1547/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anshu Prakash, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1547/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) Gujarat State Financial Vs. ACIT, Corporation, Block No.10, Circle – 4, Sector-11, Udhoyog Bhavan, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar – 382017. I.T.A. No. 1903/Ahd/2014 (Assessment Year : 2009-10) DCIT, Vs. Gujarat State Financial Circle – 4, Corporation, Block No.10, Ahmedabad Sector-11, Udhoyog Bhavan, Gandhinagar – 382017. [PAN No. AABCG 2924 M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P. F. Jain, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Anshu P…

Skylark Hospitality India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result we reverse the order of the Ld

ITA 6431/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiskylark Hospitality India (P) Vs. Dy. Cit, Ltd, Circle-9(1), Formerly Known As Ssp New Delhi Catering India P Ltd, 404, 4Th Floor, Surya Kiran Building, 19 Kg Marg, New Delhi Pan: Aalcs7159J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Mehra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kaushlendra Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 201Section 28Section 32(1)Section 40Section 40a

…and gains of business or profession'. Clause (iv) deals with the vglue of any benefit or perquisite, whether convertible into money or not, arising from business or the exercise of a profession. The Hon Delhi High Court, in Logitronics (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 333 ITR 386/197 Taxman 394/9 taxmann.com 302 and Rollatainers Ltd. v. CIT [2011] 339 ITR 54/15 taxmann.com 111 (Delhi), followed the decision of Hon Madras High Court in Iskraemeco Regent Ltd. and expounded the law that if a loan had been taken for acquiring a capital asset, waiver thereof would not amount to any income exigible to tax. If the loan is taken…

Sanjana Cryogenic Storages Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1031/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Sanjana Cryogenic Storages Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 116, Bajaj Bhavan Income Tax 11Th Floor, Nariman Point बनाम/ Circle 3(3)(1) Mumbai – 400 021 Aaykar Bhavan Vs. 6Th Floor, M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcs-5093-D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Lal Chand Choudhary,Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justein,Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…ITA No.1031/M/2015 Sanjana Cryogenic Storages Limited Assessment Year 2010-11 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ ई ” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी महावीर िसंह,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1031/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Sanjana Cryogenic Storages Limited Deputy Commissioner Of 116, Bajaj Bhavan Income Tax 11th Floor, Nariman Point बनाम/ Circle 3(3)(1) Mumbai – 400 021 Aaykar Bhavan Vs. 6th Floor, M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs. M/S Hi-Tech Electrothermic & Hyderopower Ltd

ITA/171/2017HC Delhi25 Jul 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 260ASection 37Section 41

…Weaving Mills Ltd. [2015] 378 ITR 80 (Del). 4. Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue submitted that notwithstanding the aforementioned decision, it is the decision of this Court in Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT (2011) 333 ITR 386 (Del), which would cover the case at hand. 5. The Court has perused the decision in Logitronics P. Ltd. v. CIT (supra) which holds that if a loan was taken for acquiring a capital asset, waiver thereof would not amount to income exigible to tax. On the other hand, if the loan was for trading purpose and was treated as such from the very b…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. M/S Religare Enterprises Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/751/2016HC Delhi13 Feb 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 41(1)Section 74

…Be it as it may, when the loan taken by the assessee is written off, the same cannot be treated as income of the assessee u/s 41(1) as the loan was taken on capital account. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Logitronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 333 ITR 386 has laid down the principle that if a loan was taken for acquiring a capital asset, waiver thereof would not amount to any income exigible to tax. 7.3 Similarly the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tosha International Ltd. reported in 331 ITR 440 (Delhi) held as follows. “4. We see no reason to interfere with the conclusion of the…

Epc Industries Ltd, Nashik vs. ACIT OSD 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3210/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Cn Prasad: (A.Y : 2007-08) Epc Industries Ltd. Vs. Acit Osd 10(1) Plot No.H-109, Midc Mumbai Ambad Nashik – 422010 Pan : Aaace2659J (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle H HariyaFor Respondent: Shri PR Ghosh
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 28Section 41(1)

…. [176 taxman 187 (Del)] (2) Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v/s CIT [261 ITR 501(Bom)] (3) Travancore Rubber & Tea Co Ltd. v/s CIT [243 ITR 158 (SC)] 6 M/s EPC Industries Ltd. Iskaremeco Regent Ltd.. v/s CIT [196 Taxman 103 (Mad)] (5) Logitronic P Ltd. v/s. CIT [333 ITR 386 (Del)] (6) CIT V/s Xylon Holding Pvt. Ltd. [26 Taxman.com 333 (Bom)] 7. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below in reopening the assessment u/s 147 and making addition u/s 41(1)/28(iv) in respect of the waiver of principal amount by Bank and NCD holders. 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of t…

D.C.I.T. Circle 3(3), Mumbai vs. Vibhadeep Investment & Trading Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal as well as the Cross Objection

ITA 4466/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Sri Sandeep Gosain, Jm The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vibhadeep Investment & Income Tax-3(3), Room Trading Ltd., Mafatlal House, No.609, 6Th Floor, Aayakar H. T. Parekh Marg, Backbay Bhavan, M. K. Road, Reclamation, Mumbai 400 Mumbai 400 020 020 Pan: Aaacv 1946 M Appellant .. Respondent C. O. No.155/Mum/2013 (In Ita No.4466/Mum/2012- Ay: 2008-09)

Section 115JSection 143Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI JASON P. BOAZ, AM AND SRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM The Asst. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Vibhadeep Investment & Income Tax-3(3), Room Trading Ltd., Mafatlal House, No.609, 6th Floor, Aayakar H. T. Parekh Marg, Backbay Bhavan, M. K. Road, Reclamation, Mumbai 400 Mumbai 400 020 020 PAN: AAACV 1946 M Appellant .. Respondent C. O. No.155/Mum/2013 (In ITA No.4466/Mum/2012- AY: 2008-09) M/s. Vibhadeep Investment & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Trading Ltd., Mafatlal House, H. of Income Tax-3(3), Room No.609, 6th Floor, T. Parekh Marg, Backbay Reclamation, Mumbai 40…

DCIT 3(3), Mumbai vs. Rama Industries Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1857/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri J.D. MistryFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist-Sr.A.R
Section 14Section 14ASection 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “डी” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“D”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अिमत शु"ल "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amit Shukla,Judicial Member आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./1857/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" DCIT-3(3) M/s. Rama Industries Ltd. Room No.609, 6th Floor, Aayakar 812, Raheja Chambers Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nariman Point,Mumbai-400 021. Mumbai-400 020. PAN: AAACR 5096 C आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./ 1858 /Mum/2013,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनध…

CIT vs. Icc India P. Ltd

The appeal is partly allowed in the above terms in terms

ITA/396/2012HC Delhi20 Nov 2012

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR

Section 28Section 41(1)

…v. CIT, (1996) 222 ITR 344. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee on the other hand contended that the principles applicable in the present case were correctly applied by the Tribunal. He relied upon the judgment in Logitronics Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, (2011) 333 ITR 386 (Del.) and Rollatainers Ltd. v. CIT, (2011) 339 ITR 54 (Del.). It was submitted ITA 396/2012 Page 4 of 6 that the nature and character of the receipt, which was originally capital, did not change when the conversion takes place. In this case, both the share application liability and the capital goods imported shown in th…