https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26142 Compensation received for surrender of tenancy rights in immovable property was held to be a capital receipt where the substance of the transaction showed transfer of a capital asset rather than business profits. The court applied the real nature test, finding that the assessee parted with leasehold interest with the landlord's consent, delivered vacant possession to enable expansion of another business, and transferred no stock-in-trade. Continued business elsewhere did not alter the character of the receipt. The wording used in the receipt was not conclusive in view of the surrounding circumstances and the Bombay Rent Act context, so the amount was not taxable as revenue income. en-us Mon, 02 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:47:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26142 Compensation received for surrender of tenancy rights in immovable property was held to be a capital receipt where the substance of the transaction showed transfer of a capital asset rather than business profits. The court applied the real nature test, finding that the assessee parted with leasehold interest with the landlord's consent, delivered vacant possession to enable expansion of another business, and transferred no stock-in-trade. Continued business elsewhere did not alter the character of the receipt. The wording used in the receipt was not conclusive in view of the surrounding circumstances and the Bombay Rent Act context, so the amount was not taxable as revenue income. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 Sep 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26142