<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1972 (1) TMI 116 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293186</link>
    <description>Payments under a dissolution deed for use of a business name and goodwill are treated according to the true substance of the arrangement, not its label. Where the deed fixes no lump-sum purchase price, makes payments depend on profits, leaves duration indefinite, and indicates that payments continue only while the business is carried on in the same name, the arrangement points to a licence to use goodwill rather than an outright sale. On that footing, the payments are revenue in nature and deductible in computing business income. The text also records a dissenting view that the deed reflected an absolute sale of goodwill, with the payments representing capital expenditure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2021 12:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=634054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (1) TMI 116 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293186</link>
      <description>Payments under a dissolution deed for use of a business name and goodwill are treated according to the true substance of the arrangement, not its label. Where the deed fixes no lump-sum purchase price, makes payments depend on profits, leaves duration indefinite, and indicates that payments continue only while the business is carried on in the same name, the arrangement points to a licence to use goodwill rather than an outright sale. On that footing, the payments are revenue in nature and deductible in computing business income. The text also records a dissenting view that the deed reflected an absolute sale of goodwill, with the payments representing capital expenditure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293186</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>