Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.46 seconds)B.G. Shah vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 October, 1985
29. The Bombay High Court in B G Shah V. CIT (supra) was
concerned with consideration for non-performance of tenancy and held
that compensation received for termination of tenancy agreement on
account of non-performance was a capital receipt as the tenancy was itself
a capital asset.
Section 56 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 28 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 111 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Guffic Chem P.Ltd vs C.I.T,Belgaum & Anr on 16 March, 2011
In Guffic Chem (P) Ltd. (supra), the Supreme Court considered
the taxability of receipts and their classification as capital or revenue. The
__________
Page 12 of 18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 19/02/2026 03:09:37 pm )
TCA Nos. 92 and 93 of 2013
question that had been framed for determination was whether a payment
under an agreement not to compete (negative covenant) is a capital or a
revenue receipt.
Oberoi Hotel Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 10 March, 1999
In Oberoi Hotel Private Ltd. (supra), the Supreme Court
considered the taxability of a receipt for giving up of first option of
purchase/lease of hotel. The factual scenario is similar to the present case.
Baroda Cement And Chemicals Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 9 December, 1985
30. The decisions of the Gujarat and Delhi High Court in Baroda
Cement and Chemical Ltd. (supra) and J Dalmia (supra) would support
the conclusions we have arrived at. In both cases, the right to sue was
held to be a capital asset, the assessing authority bringing to tax the
compensation received as capital gains. Ultimately, the Court quashed the
demands on the ground that the question of capital gains would not arise
in the absence of cost of acquisition.