Tribunal Ruling: Capital Gains Exemption, Legitimate Expenses Allowed, Non-Compete Fee Taxable

The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions on all contested issues, dismissing the revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objections. The additions for trademarks, know-how, and product information were deemed exempt capital receipts not taxable under long-term capital gains. Service charges paid to M/s. Tri Star Home Products (P) Ltd. were allowed as legitimate business expenses. The non-compete fee was not considered a capital receipt and was held liable to tax. The delay in filing cross objections was condoned, and they were admitted for consideration. The order was pronounced on 13/11/2018.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of additions on account of trademark, sale of know-how, and product information.
2. Deletion of disallowance of service charges paid to M/s. Tri Star Home Products (P) Ltd.
3. Consideration of non-compete fee as capital receipt not liable to tax.
4. Condonation of delay in filing cross objections.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Additions on Account of Trademark, Sale of Know-how, and Product Information:
The revenue challenged the deletion of additions amounting to Rs. 1.75 crores for trademarks, Rs. 25 lakhs for know-how, and Rs. 75 lakhs for product information by the CIT(A). The assessee, a public limited company engaged in manufacturing housecleaning products, had entered into an agreement with Henkel Spic India Limited for selling these assets. The assessee claimed these receipts as exempt capital receipts. The assessing officer, however, treated them as taxable under long-term capital gains, considering the cost of acquisition as nil. The CIT(A) held that trademarks, know-how, and product information are distinct from goodwill and hence not taxable under capital gains. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the cost of acquisition for these assets is indeterminate, and thus, the receipts are not chargeable to tax.

2. Deletion of Disallowance of Service Charges Paid to M/s. Tri Star Home Products (P) Ltd.:
The revenue also contested the deletion of disallowance of Rs. 1.85 lakhs paid as service charges to M/s. Tri Star Home Products (P) Ltd. The assessing officer disallowed the charges on the grounds that the assessee had sold its business to Henkel and thus did not require such services post-sale. The CIT(A) allowed the claim, stating that the services were availed for business purposes in regions where the assessee did not have its own staff. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding no infirmity in the order.

3. Consideration of Non-compete Fee as Capital Receipt Not Liable to Tax:
The assessee raised a cross objection, claiming that the Rs. 1.5 crores received as non-compete fee should be considered a capital receipt and not liable to tax. The tribunal noted that the assessee had initially offered this amount for taxation and did not object before the assessing officer or CIT(A). The tribunal held that the issue of non-compete fee was not part of the order of the CIT(A) and thus could not be raised in cross objections. The tribunal dismissed the cross objection, stating that the appropriate remedy for the assessee would be under section 264 of the Income Tax Act, not in an appeal before the tribunal.

4. Condonation of Delay in Filing Cross Objections:
The assessee filed cross objections with a delay of 552 days, citing recent legal advice as the reason. The tribunal condoned the delay, considering the reasons acceptable and noting that the delay was not due to any deliberate negligence. The tribunal admitted the cross objections for consideration.

Conclusion:
The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objections, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on all contested issues. The order was pronounced in open court on 13/11/2018.

---