https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5231 Amounts received under compromise and amicable arrangements were held to be taxable income, because they arose from settlement of rights connected with the assessee's business interest rather than as compensation for extinction of a capital asset. Depreciation was denied on a 1/6th share in sugar mill assets, since section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 allows depreciation only to the owner of the property and a fractional share did not satisfy that requirement. Carry-forward business loss could not be set off against the assessee's share of rent from the receiver, because section 24 required income from the same business in which the loss was suffered. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5231 Amounts received under compromise and amicable arrangements were held to be taxable income, because they arose from settlement of rights connected with the assessee's business interest rather than as compensation for extinction of a capital asset. Depreciation was denied on a 1/6th share in sugar mill assets, since section 10(2)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 allows depreciation only to the owner of the property and a fractional share did not satisfy that requirement. Carry-forward business loss could not be set off against the assessee's share of rent from the receiver, because section 24 required income from the same business in which the loss was suffered. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5231