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

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

ITA 29/BIL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

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…

Ajay B. Ghose, Thane vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1720/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleajay B. Ghose Vs. Dcit – Cpc Flat No. 504, Angelo, Post Bag No. 1, Hiranandani Estate, Electronic City, Ghobander Road, Thane Bangaluru – 560500. Maharashtra– 400607. Pan/Gir No. : Aebpg1796A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Gunjan Kakkad. ARFor Respondent: Shri. Mehul B. Jain. DR
Section 143(1)Section 17(3)(i)

…yment which cannot be disputed. The Ld.AR supported the submissions with the fallowing judicial decisions as under;- “1. CIT Vs. Ajit Kumar Bose, [1987] 165 ITR 90 2. CIT Vs. Sharda Sinha [2016] 237 Taxman 111 (Delhi) 3. Oberio Hotel (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 903 (SC) 4. Khanna & Annadhanam Vs. CIT [2003] 351 ITR 110 (Delhi) 5. Arunbhai R Naik Vs. ITO [2015] 379 ITR 511 (Guj) M/s Ajay B Ghose, Mumbai 6, Chandrakant Tolia Vs. ACIT [2009] 316 ITR 312 (Madras) 7. Bajaj Auto Finance Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 404 ITR 564 (Bombay) 8. Kvaverner John Brown Engg. Vs. ACIT [2008] 305 ITR 103 (SC) 9. Khatua Junkar Ltd Vs…

DCIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata vs. M/S. Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 453/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Kolkata Port Trust Circle-35, Kolkata. (PAN: AAAJK0361L) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No.23/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kolkata Port Trust Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-35, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 452/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commis…

DCIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata vs. M/S. Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 452/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Kolkata Port Trust Circle-35, Kolkata. (PAN: AAAJK0361L) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No.23/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kolkata Port Trust Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-35, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 452/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commis…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 369/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Kolkata Port Trust Circle-35, Kolkata. (PAN: AAAJK0361L) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No.23/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kolkata Port Trust Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-35, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 452/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commis…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 368/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Kolkata Port Trust Circle-35, Kolkata. (PAN: AAAJK0361L) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No.23/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kolkata Port Trust Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-35, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 452/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commis…

Kolkata Port Trust, Kolkata vs. JCIT, Range - 35, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and COs of the assessee are dismissed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 367/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम" "ी ए.ट". वक", "या"यक सद"य एवं डॉ ए.एल. सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Kolkata Port Trust Circle-35, Kolkata. (PAN: AAAJK0361L) Appellant Respondent & C.O. No.23/Kol/2019 In I.T.A. No. 453/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kolkata Port Trust Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-35, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 452/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commis…

Hemalatha Rajan, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 668/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 143(3)Section 147

…terdam. This compensation stated to have been received for forgoing right of sue for breach of contract and claimed the compensation to be capital receipt placing reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel P. Ltd vs. CIT, 236 ITR 903 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shyam Telelink Ltd vs. ITO, 99 ITD 576. The addition was contested before the ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 31.07.2012 confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Even on further appeal before the Tribunal came to be dismissed vide order dated 20.12.2012 in ITA No. 1776/Mds/2012 for assessment…

Karuppusamy Pandiarajan, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 4(1), Chennai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 667/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 143(3)Section 147

…terdam. This compensation stated to have been received for forgoing right of sue for breach of contract and claimed the compensation to be capital receipt placing reliance on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel P. Ltd vs. CIT, 236 ITR 903 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Shyam Telelink Ltd vs. ITO, 99 ITD 576. The addition was contested before the ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 31.07.2012 confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Even on further appeal before the Tribunal came to be dismissed vide order dated 20.12.2012 in ITA No. 1776/Mds/2012 for assessment…

Dy.C.I.T. 1(2), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Rishabh Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Raipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 157/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 165Section 4Section 44A

…x and accordingly has shown the same under the head ‘Reserve and Surplus’. In support of this claim, the assessee placed reliance on following citations :- 1. Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1964) 53 ITR 261 (SC) 2. Oberoi Hotel (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1999) 236 ITR 903 (SC) 3. Karam Chand Thapar & Soons Bros. P. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1971) 80 ITR 167 (SC ) 4. CIT Vs. Saurashtra Cement Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 422 (SC) 5. Khanna & Annadhanam Vs. CIT (2013) 351 ITR 110 (Delhi.HC) 6. ACIT Vs. Triupati Udyog Ltd. (2013) 36 CCH 157 (ITAT.Del) 7. Parle Soft Drinks Pvt. Ltd. Vs. JCTI (2013) 37 CCH 099 (ITAT. Mum) 8. 3I Infotech L…

D vs. Dishti Industries Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 1277/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1277/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal
Section 14ASection 2(47)Section 43(1)

…y the Ld. Counsel for the assessee in the cases of Sterling Construction and Investments 374 ITR 474 (Bom.), Abbasbhoy A. Dehgamwalla 195 ITR 28 (Bom.), CIT Vs. J. Dalmia 149 ITR 215 (Delhi), Bharat Forge Co. Ltd. 205 ITR 339 (Bom.), Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. 236 ITR 903 (SC) and Saurashtra Cement Ltd. 325 ITR 422 (SC) are all distinguishable on facts. Making a (supra) Ld. DR critically explained stating that the said case is the one, where the source of income is terminated whereas in the present case, it is the case of surrender/extinguishment of certain rights in the immovable property and there is no way,…

DCIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Ashwini Manmohan Kakkar, Mumbai

In the result, departmental appeal is dismissed

ITA 5315/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Dy. Commissioner Of Mr. Ashwini Manmohan Income-Tax 1(3), Kakkar, Centre-1, 28Th Floor, 11-B, Jolly Maker World Trade Centre, Vs. Apartment, Cuffe Parade, Cuffee Parade, Mumbai – 400 005 Colaba, Mumbai – 400 005 Pan: Aacpk9698Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Dr. K. Shivaram, A.R. & Shri Rahul Hakani, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 11.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.02.2018 O R D E R Per D.T. Garasia: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 08.03.2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Short Facts Of The Case Are As Under: During The Previous Year Relating To A.Y. 2007-08 Assessee Had Received An Amount Of 10,74,260/- Euro From Thomas Cook, Uk.

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 2(24)Section 28Section 8O

…n of the contracts, the Appellant has veritably lost his source of consultancy income. The Appellant has correctly relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Kettlewell Bullen and Co Ltd. vs. CIT 53 ITR 261 {SC} and Oberoi Hotels Ltd. vs. CIT 236 ITR 903 {SC}. These decisions have held when the compensation paid is relatable to the loss of source of income, the compensation is a capital receipt and not taxable as income. This legal position has also been concurred by the Assessing Officer in his assessment order. His only disagreement was that the compensations was taxable u\s 28 (ii)(a), 28 (ii)…

V.C. Nannapaneni vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITTA/159/2005HC Telangana05 Jan 2018

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

For Appellant: Mr. K. Vasant KumarFor Respondent: Ms. K. Mamata
Section 10(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD I.T.T.A. Nos.159 and 160 of 2005 DATED:05-01-2018 Between: V.C. Nannapaneni … Appellant And Commissioner of Income Tax Hyderabad-2 Ayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh Hyderabad … Respondent COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr. K. Vasant Kumar COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms. K. Mamata THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CVNR, J & TA, J ITTAs 159 & 160/2005 2 COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nag…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagat Ram Trehan & Sons, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5404/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. R.S. Singhvi, CA & Sh. SatyajitFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 28

…ase for Asstt. Year 2003-04 is reproduced as under: GROUND NO. 1 “There is s no dispute to the well settled legal proposition that damages received on loss of sources of income amounts to capital receipt. Hon’ble Supreme Court "in the case of Oberoi Hotels-236 ITR 903 held that amount received on loss of source of income is a capital receipt. The damages so 5 received were not on 'account: of any work done or likely to be done, but for loss of income earning apparatus. Damages were for injury inflicted on income earning apparatus of assessee. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P. H. Divecha & Anr. Vs CIT…

Digital Electronics Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 3258/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey() & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi,ARFor Respondent: Shri B. S. Bist, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(47)

…rt in CIT v. B.C.Srinivasa Setty (1981) 128 ITR 294(SC), no capital gains could be computed and hence the amount received was not taxable. The ld CIT(A) noted that the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (1999) 236 ITR 903 (SC) and B.C.Srinivasa Setty (supra) ( relied on by the present appellant) were also considered by the ITAT, Hyderabad while passing the order. The ld. CIT(A) thus comes to a finding that the decision in the case of M/s Natco Pharma Ltd. (supra) applies to the present case as the assessee gave up its rights and entitlements to purchase shares and…

Allcatel Usa Sourcing Lp ( Included in Alcatel-Lucent Usa Inc.), Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) RG 1, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8601/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.8601 & 7533/Mum/2010 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2006-07 & 2007-08 M/S. Alcatel Usa Sourcing The Addl. Director Of बनाम/ Lp (Included In Alcatel- Income-Tax (International Vs. Lucent Usa Inc.) Taxation)-1, C/O Pricewaterhouse Scindia House, Coopers, Mumbai Pwc House, 4Th Floor, Guru Nanak Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aalfa9998A आयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No.7534 & 7535/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08 & 2008-09 M/S. Alcatel Usa Sourcing The Addl. Director Of बनाम/ Inc (Included In Alcatel- Income-Tax (International Vs. Lucent Usa Inc.) Taxation)-1, C/O Pricewaterhouse Scindia House, Coopers, Mumbai Pwc House, 4Th Floor, Guru Nanak Road, Bandra(W), Mumbai-400 050 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aagca4535R .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwalla अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Madhur Agarwal Shri K.K. Ved ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Jasbir Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chauhan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 234B

…me or involves loss of enduring assets, the payment made to compensate for cancellation of the agency agreement is normally a capital receipt. This principle has been further confirmed by the Supreme Court in the case of Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 903 (SC). 2.5.3 Relying on the facts of the case and the principles laid down in the various judicial precedents (cited above), the assessee submitted that the aforesaid amount of USD 2.54 million is 'revenue' in nature for the following reasons: * The aforesaid agreement is only a business arrangement. *. The profitability of the assessee is not…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Mr.Gopi Chand

ITTA/8/2008HC Telangana23 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Hcl Infosystems Ltd

ITA/167/2003HC Delhi21 Dec 2015
Section 260A

…ITA 167/2003 Page 1 of 21 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 167/2003 Reserved on : November 26, 2015 Date of decision: December 21, 2015 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raghvendra K. Singh, Junior Standing counsel. versus HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha and Ms. Mehak Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU J U D G M E N T % 21.12.2015 D…

Ajay Kumar Doshi., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T.Cir - 54, Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, while the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1866/KOL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

…ed in the total income of the aforesaid person had it been received before such discontinuance." 4.3 The Ld. AR quoted the verdict in the case of Kettle well Bullen & Co. Ltd. (35 ITR 261)(SC), Vazir Sultan & Sons (36 ITR 175)(SC) and Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. (236 ITR 903)(SC), and Naresh Narayan Saxena vs. CIT 220 ITR 19 in support of his contentions. These cases relate to receipts against loss of business assets or sources. Thus these judgments are distinguished vis-a-vis the appellant's case. His profession did not cease and the source of such income not extinguished but there was only a change in terms which c…

Khanna and Annadhanam vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result we answer the substantial question of law by holding

ITA - 1286 / 2008HC Delhi29 Jan 2013
For Appellant: Mr Ajay Vohra, Ms Kavita Jha and Mr SomnathFor Respondent: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr
Section 260A

…me, it would be capital and it matters little that the assessee continues to be in receipt of income from its other similar operations. 7. We may refer to one more judgment of the Supreme Court which is reported as Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT: (1999) 236 ITR 903. There the assessee was operating, managing and administering several hotels across the globe such as Cairo, Colombo, Kathmandu, Singapore, etc. Its agreement with Hotel Oberoi Imperial, Singapore, which it was operating 2013:DHC:430-DB ITA No.1286 /2008 Page 6 of 9 from 02.11.1970 was terminated and the assessee receive…