Panaji, Goa v. M/S Sesa Kemmbla Coke Co. Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA TAX APPEAL NO. 57 OF 2006. The Commissioner of Income Tax, having office at AayakarBhavan Patto, Plaza, Panaji, Goa. .... Appellant. Versus M/s Sesa Kemmbla Coke Co. Ltd., Sesa Ghor, Pato Plaza, Panaji, Goa. .... Respondent. Shri S. R. Rivankar, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri V. Frank, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM: J. N. PATEL & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. DATE: 27th November, 2006. O R D E R:( Per J.N. Patel, J.) The Revenue has preferred this appeal, impugning the Orderdated 2.01.2006 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in I.T.A. No.218/PNJ/2002. 2. It is the contention of the Revenue that the Tribunal has erred ininterpreting the various clauses of the Technical Collaboration Agreementdated 18.08.93 and holding that the amount of US $ 20,00,001/­ received by the assessee under the said Agreement was in the nature of capital receipt. 3. It is contended that it will have to be construed that it is arevenue receipt as the payment was received in ordinary course of thebusiness of the assessee for loss of production sustained by them and as hasno nexus to capital expenditure. 4. The contention of the Revenue is mostly based on a conjointreading of the various clauses of the said Agreement which, in our view, hasbeen rightly dealt with by the Tribunal and the Tribunal has given specificreason in para 4.2 of the impugned Order as to why the said receipt willhave to be considered as a capital receipt by placing reliance on aJudgment rendered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case ofCommissioner Income Tax Vs. Barium Chemicals Ltd. (1987) 168 ITR 164.Therefore in the facts and circumstances, we do not think that anysubstantial question of law arises for our decision. Therefore, the Appeal is dismissed. J. N. PATEL, J. sl. N. A. BRITTO, J.