https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8623 The court determined that the sum of Rs. 30,000 received in the form of shares was a capital receipt, not a revenue receipt, in the hands of the petitioner. The court emphasized that the consideration for transferring the dealership rights, which constituted the capital of the assessee, should also be considered capital. Additionally, the court noted that the Tribunal erred in treating the entire face value of the shares as a revenue receipt without determining their market value. As a result, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that the amount was not liable to tax and awarded costs to the assessee. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 May 2009 17:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8623 The court determined that the sum of Rs. 30,000 received in the form of shares was a capital receipt, not a revenue receipt, in the hands of the petitioner. The court emphasized that the consideration for transferring the dealership rights, which constituted the capital of the assessee, should also be considered capital. Additionally, the court noted that the Tribunal erred in treating the entire face value of the shares as a revenue receipt without determining their market value. As a result, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that the amount was not liable to tax and awarded costs to the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8623