https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384543 The High Court held that the amount received towards a restrictive covenant by the appellant was a capital receipt not chargeable to tax. The Court emphasized the commercial prudence behind the restrictive covenant, concluding that the payment was for the exploitation of services and infrastructure, falling under capital receipt. The Court also ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the bad debts recovered, setting aside the Tribunal's decision and restoring the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]'s order. en-us Wed, 19 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384543 The High Court held that the amount received towards a restrictive covenant by the appellant was a capital receipt not chargeable to tax. The Court emphasized the commercial prudence behind the restrictive covenant, concluding that the payment was for the exploitation of services and infrastructure, falling under capital receipt. The Court also ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the bad debts recovered, setting aside the Tribunal's decision and restoring the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]'s order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384543