PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The ITAT ruled that compensation received by the appellant from Disney Enterprises Inc. for erosion in investment value due to termination of merchandising and distribution rights did not constitute taxable income under section 28(ii)(b). The Tribunal determined that the appellant was not a managing agency in terms of the statutory provision, which requires stricter interpretation as per Commissioner v. Dilip Kumar. The compensation was held to be a capital receipt not liable to tax. Additionally, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's ground regarding section 73 Explanation, ruling that losses on share sales were not speculative in nature, as previously established in the appellant's 2002-03 case where it was determined the appellant was not engaged in share trading.
The ITAT ruled that compensation received by the appellant from Disney Enterprises Inc. for erosion in investment value due to termination of merchandising and distribution rights did not constitute taxable income under section 28(ii)(b). The Tribunal determined that the appellant was not a managing agency in terms of the statutory provision, which requires stricter interpretation as per Commissioner v. Dilip Kumar. The compensation was held to be a capital receipt not liable to tax. Additionally, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's ground regarding section 73 Explanation, ruling that losses on share sales were not speculative in nature, as previously established in the appellant's 2002-03 case where it was determined the appellant was not engaged in share trading.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
