https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120451 The Tribunal ruled that the transfer of the TFD division to ITEL was neither a demerger under section 2(19AA) nor a slump sale under section 2(42C) of the Act, as it was part of an amalgamation scheme approved by the Bombay HC. Consequently, the provisions of section 50B and section 48 for capital gains computation were inapplicable due to the absence of consideration and inability to determine asset values. Lease income was classified as 'income from business,' and software expenditure was deemed capital. The disallowance of obsolete stock was overturned, and the non-compete payment issue was remanded. The appeal was partly allowed. en-us Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 10 Dec 2023 16:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120451 The Tribunal ruled that the transfer of the TFD division to ITEL was neither a demerger under section 2(19AA) nor a slump sale under section 2(42C) of the Act, as it was part of an amalgamation scheme approved by the Bombay HC. Consequently, the provisions of section 50B and section 48 for capital gains computation were inapplicable due to the absence of consideration and inability to determine asset values. Lease income was classified as 'income from business,' and software expenditure was deemed capital. The disallowance of obsolete stock was overturned, and the non-compete payment issue was remanded. The appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120451