Oberoi Hotel Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

236 ITR 903Supreme Court of India1999#2776 most cited

What is Oberoi Hotel Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax authority for?

Compensation received for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of a source of income is classified as a capital receipt and is not liable to income tax.

42

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Oberoi Hotel Private Limited v. CIT · 236 ITR 903 · capital receipt · loss of capital asset · loss of source of income · compensation for loss · income tax liability · Section 28(iv) · relinquishment of right · capital vs revenue receipts · non-taxable receipt

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 28(iv)Section 10(15A)Section 10(2)(a)Section 11Section 12Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

dtaa benefitsection 28(va)principal purpose testmultilateral instrumentrelinquishment of rightuse of equipmentcommercial substancesection 90(1)substance over formsection 55(2)fixed place petreaty benefits

Judgments citing Oberoi Hotel Private Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

Milan Saini, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2335/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Milan Saini, Vs. Dcit, 37, Centrum Plaza, Dlf Golf Circle-2. Course Road, Sector 53, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Haryana) Pan: Braps1366P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 17Section 250(6)Section 28

…eceipt not liable to tax: 13 Kettlewell Bullen and Co. Ltd. v. CIT: (1964) 53 ITR 261 (SC) (ii) CIT v. Saurashtra Cement Ltd: (2010) 325 ITR 422 (SC) (iii) CIT vs. Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation: (1986) 161 ITR 386 (SC) (iv) Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT: 236 ITR 903 (SC) (v) CIT v. Parle Soft Drinks (Bangalore) (P.) Ltd.: [2018] 400 ITR 108 (Bom)- SLP filed by the Revenue against the aforesaid decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Parle Soft Drinks (Bangalore (P.) Ltd.) reported at [2018] 97 taxmann.com 136 (SC) (vi) Khanna & Annadhanam vs. CIT: [2013] 351 ITR 110 (Del) (vii) Pr. CIT…

Tfdac Ireland II Limited, Ireland vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax International Tax Circle 4(1)(2) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 1198/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

Dae(Sy22) Leasing (Ireland)41, Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 2(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1157/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

Dae (Sabs) Leasing Ireland 43 Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax.Circle 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed and

ITA 1156/MUM/2025[2022-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-22
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

Dae (Sabs) 10296 Ireland Designated Activity Company, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Taxation), Cirlce 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed and

ITA 1155/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

Sky High Xliii Leasing Company Limited, Ireland vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Int Tax Circle 4 (2) (1) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 1122/MUM/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-2023
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

Ortus Aircraft Lease 6(Dublin) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 3(2)(2) International Taxation, Mumbai

ITA 1106/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)

…t the only other way such receipt can assume the character of a capital receipt is, if it is found that it represents a compensation for the loss of a capital asset or the loss of source of income as in the case of Oberoi Hotels (P) Ltd., vs., CIT reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC) = 2002-TIOL-2355-SC-IT-LB . It is also not an equity, loan or debt. He submitted that it is really incomprehensible that such credits flowing from a commercial agreement being the outcome of the negotiations with regard to the purchase of engines [the Agreement Dated 19.10.2005 supersedes earlier negotiations clearly indicating that the pric…

M J Associates, Palakkad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Palakkad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 785/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sriram A.S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…n received. 7. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order, after analysing various judicial precedents and also placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel (P) Ltd. v. CIT 236 ITR 903 held that the compensation received is revenue in nature. 8. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee that the compensation in question was received by the appellant firm for settlement of dispute that arose as a result of breach of contract. Therefor…

M J Associates, Palakkad vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Palakkad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 784/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sriram A.S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Sivanandan, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…n received. 7. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order, after analysing various judicial precedents and also placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel (P) Ltd. v. CIT 236 ITR 903 held that the compensation received is revenue in nature. 8. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee that the compensation in question was received by the appellant firm for settlement of dispute that arose as a result of breach of contract. Therefor…

Shrikant Anantrao Zori, Aurangabad vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(1) Aurangabad, Aurangabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 798/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Patakh &For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 17(3)(i)Section 89

…source of income for the last 20 years." The mere fact that the Assessee was free to earn through other sources would not make a difference to this position. Supreme Court in Kettlewell Bullen and Company Ltd. (supra) and Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 903 (SC), this court held that if the receipt represents compensation for the loss of a source of income, it would be capital and it matters little that the assessee continues to be in receipt of income from its other similar operations." Accordingly, Court was satisfied that the question framed had to be answered in affirmative i.e. in favour of the…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata.

ITA 1811/KOL/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…dered this compensation amount to Rs.1,45,09,867/- received from UNO Compensation Committee (UNCC) as revenue income. The grievance of the assessee is that the ld.AO has totally ignored the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC), where the fact was that the assessee company received compensation for giving of right to manage hotel in Singapore. It was considered by Hon’ble Supreme Court that compensation for giving the right to manage hotel or loss of future profit is capital receipt. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but ld.CIT(A) upheld…

DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata vs. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1808/KOL/2006[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…dered this compensation amount to Rs.1,45,09,867/- received from UNO Compensation Committee (UNCC) as revenue income. The grievance of the assessee is that the ld.AO has totally ignored the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC), where the fact was that the assessee company received compensation for giving of right to manage hotel in Singapore. It was considered by Hon’ble Supreme Court that compensation for giving the right to manage hotel or loss of future profit is capital receipt. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but ld.CIT(A) upheld…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

ITA 489/KOL/2005[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 May 2024AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri. Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…dered this compensation amount to Rs.1,45,09,867/- received from UNO Compensation Committee (UNCC) as revenue income. The grievance of the assessee is that the ld.AO has totally ignored the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case reported in 236 ITR 903 (SC), where the fact was that the assessee company received compensation for giving of right to manage hotel in Singapore. It was considered by Hon’ble Supreme Court that compensation for giving the right to manage hotel or loss of future profit is capital receipt. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but ld.CIT(A) upheld…

Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai vs. Piramal Enterprises Ltd (Formerly Knwon As Piramal Healthcare Ltd) (As Ultimate Successor to Nicholas Piramal India Ltd), Mumbai

ITA 5091/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Gala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chogule, (Addl. CIT) Sr. A.R
Section 28Section 40Section 45

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner of Limited (Formerly known Income Tax, as Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier known as Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, LBS Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 PAN: AAACN4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly known Circle-8(2)(1)…

Piramal Healthcare Ltd ( Earlier Knownas Nicholas Piramal India Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 3706/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner Of Limited (Formerly Known Income Tax, As Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier Known As Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, Lbs Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner Of M/S. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly Known Circle-8(2)(1), As Piramal Healthcare [Erstwhile Dcit Circle- Ltd.) (As Ultimate 7(1)], Successor To Nicholas Vs. Mumbai. Piramal India Ltd.), Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Pan: Aaacn4538P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Priyank Gala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.D. Chogule, (Addl. CIT) Sr. A.R
Section 28Section 40Section 45

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s. Piramal Enterprises Dy. Commissioner of Limited (Formerly known Income Tax, as Piramal Healthcare Range-8(2)(1), Limited) (Earlier known as Mumbai. Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.), Vs. Piramal Tower, Agastya Corporate Park, LBS Marg, Kamani Junction, Kurla (West), Mumbai – 400 070 PAN: AAACN4538P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of M/s. Piramal Enterprises Income Tax, Limited (Formerly known Circle-8(2)(1)…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata - III & Anr

ITA/8/2008HC Calcutta01 Sept 2023

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI,HON'BLE JUSTICE BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY

…ITA 8 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA In appeal from its SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata – III & Anr. Before: The Hon’ble Justice I. P. MUKERJI And The Hon’ble Justice BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY Date: 1st September 2023 Appearance: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Mr. Akhilesh Kr. Gupta, Advocate Ms. Akshara Shukla, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Swarajit Roychoudhury, Advocate for the respondent The Court: A very interesting question of law is involved in this appeal. It arises out of the two agreements between the ap…

M/S Kwality Cafe & Restaurant P Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/585/2006HC Punjab & Haryana18 Apr 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Section 260A

…has referred to a number of judgments i.e. CIT vs. Rai Bahadur Jairam Valji, (1959) 35 ITR 148 (SC), Kettlewell Bullen and Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1964) 53 ITR 261 (SC), Divecha (P.H.) vs. CIT, (1963) 48 ITR 222 (SC) and Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1999) 236 ITR 903 (SC). As per opinion of the Tribunal, receipt of consideration for transfer of goodwill/trade marks and trade names is a capital receipt and not a revenue receipt. Thereafter, the Tribunal proceeded to examine the issue of value of the goodwill, which had been transferred by the assessee. This value could have been evaluated by well accepted…

ACIT Cent .Cir6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Kenneth Builders & Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2396/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhthe Asstt. Commissioner Vs. Kenneth Builders & Of Income Tax, Cc-6(4) Developers Limited Room No. 1925, 19Th 15Th Floor, Tower – 1, Floor, Air India Building, Indiabulls Finance Center Nariman Point, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai- 400021 Elphistone, Mumbai - 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacck8268P Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Rakesh RanjanFor Respondent: K. Gopal & Om Kandalkar
Section 115JSection 143(2)

…our the commitment. That is capital in nature. That source of income, by way of setting up of a bottling plant at P a g e | 14 Pune territory was lost forever. Hence, relying upon the judgment in the case of Oberoi Hotel (P) Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 103 Taxman 236/236 ITR 903 (SC), the argument that such a receipt cannot be taxed as revenue receipt or casual income, was accepted. The Tribunal, noted the arguments of the revenue and particularly the summary of the same. Thereafter, the Tribunal dealt with the main dispute and as above. [Para 19] Therefore, a different view on facts could not have been taken. [Para 20]…

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 ()

…andum of Association we are authorised to cany on the business which will result in direct competition with the business of the joint venture company. We further rely on following judicial pronouncements to support our view: i) Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (236 ITR 903) (Supreme Court): The assessee in this case was engaged in the business of maintaining and operating hotels. It had entered into an agreement to operate a hotel in Singapore on payment of a management fee for a period of 10 years with an option to ask for renewal for another 10 years apart from an option for pre-emptive purchase in case the owner…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax-3(1), Raipur, Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S M/S Risabh Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Raipur (Cg)

ITA 30/BIL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.(S)29 & 30/Rpr/2017 Co No.(S) 04 & 05/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Risabh Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Manas Bhawan, Near Adarsh Garage, Opp. Pujari Park, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.). Pan : Aaccr4411P ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Debashis Lahiri, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…above clarification issued by LIPL clearly shows that the compensation received by the assessee is for sterilization of the profit making apparatus of the assessee company. 18. We find Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1999) 236 ITR 903 (SC) has decided somewhat similar case. In that case, the assessee there in was operating, managing & administering many hotels belonging to others for a fee. In terms of an agreement running into a tenure of ten years, the assessee agreed to operate a Hotel in Singapore for which it was to receive a Management Fee. Article XVIII of the said agre…