https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21057 The court held that the payment made to a rival bidder to withdraw from an auction regarding the right to vend arrack was contrary to public policy as it aimed to reduce competition and maximize state revenue. Additionally, the court determined that the payment constituted capital expenditure as it was made to obtain a privilege for setting up the business, rather than for earning current income. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, concluding that the payment was not valid under the Income-tax Act. en-us Thu, 06 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:16:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21057 The court held that the payment made to a rival bidder to withdraw from an auction regarding the right to vend arrack was contrary to public policy as it aimed to reduce competition and maximize state revenue. Additionally, the court determined that the payment constituted capital expenditure as it was made to obtain a privilege for setting up the business, rather than for earning current income. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, concluding that the payment was not valid under the Income-tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21057