The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 7, Mumbai v. Mr.achuta S. Shetty

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2656 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 7, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus Mr.Achuta S. Shetty..Respondent. Ms.S.V. Bharucha for the appellant.Mr.Madhur Agarwal i/by Mint & Conferer for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 19[th] March 2013 P.C. : 1.In this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2001-02, following questions of law have been proposed for our consideration. “a)Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the compensation of Rs.55,00,000/- received by the assessee for not engaging in any business either directly or indirectly in competition with Orion International Support Services Private Limited was a capital receipt not chargeable to tax ? b)Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the fact that the compensation received by the assessee is neither as injury to the trading operation nor for loss of asset of enduring nature ? c) Whether, the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s. Best & Co (60 ITR 22) and Kettlewell Bullen & Co V/s. CIT (53 ITR 261) relied on the by the assessing officer ?” 2.Counsel for the parties state that the issues arising in the present appeal are covered in favour of the assessee and against the Respondent by the decision of this Court in the matter of Guffic Chem P. Limited V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2011) 332 ITR 602 (SC). 3.In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)