https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391034 Compensation received for relinquishing a mere right to sue was treated as a capital receipt, because a right to sue is not transferable property and is not a capital asset for capital gains purposes. The Tribunal held that the earlier co-ordinate bench ruling in the assessee's own case applied on identical legal and factual principles, and rejected the first appellate authority's factual distinctions as unsustainable. Allegations of a circular arrangement or related-party involvement did not change the character of the receipt, so it could not be assessed as business income or unexplained cash credit. The addition was therefore unsustainable. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Mar 2020 16:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391034 Compensation received for relinquishing a mere right to sue was treated as a capital receipt, because a right to sue is not transferable property and is not a capital asset for capital gains purposes. The Tribunal held that the earlier co-ordinate bench ruling in the assessee's own case applied on identical legal and factual principles, and rejected the first appellate authority's factual distinctions as unsustainable. Allegations of a circular arrangement or related-party involvement did not change the character of the receipt, so it could not be assessed as business income or unexplained cash credit. The addition was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391034