2015 (10) TMI 1457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he issue relating to non compete fees of Rs. 31.45 crores and VRS expenses of Rs. 3.90 crores. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently submitted that there is a mistake apparent from the record and need to be rectified by the Tribunal. 3. We have carefully perused the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 498/M/03. We find force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel. The additional ground No. 1 & 2 remained unadjudicated. We, accordingly take up the additional grounds remained unadjudicated. 4. Additional ground No. 1 relates to the disallowance of proportionate amount of premium paid on redemption of non-convertible debentures. 5. This issue is decided by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in A.Y. 1992-93 vide ITA No. 1584/Mu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the claim of depreciation in line with the findings of the Tribunal for A.Y. 1992-93. Additional ground No. 2 is accordingly allowed. 8. The next grievance of the assessee relates to the non compete fees of Rs. 31.45 crores. 9. The facts relating to this issue are that non-compete fees received by the assessee was part of the total consideration and the AO taxed it as income from business u/s. 28 of the Act. The First Appellate authority decided this issue against the assessee on the basis that Sec. 28(va) is retrospective. However, the Ld. CIT(A) explicitly upheld the findings that non-compete fees of Rs. 31.45 crores is part of the total sale consideration of Rs. 130.99 crores. 10. When the matter travelled upto the Tribunal, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessee because agreements between the company and employees were not provided. The Ld. Senior Counsel further pointed out in A.Y. 1993-94, the Tribunal has set aside the matter only with a direction to see that the amount claimed is as per actuarial valuation certificates. 12.1 While deciding this issue during the year under consideration, the Tribunal has followed the orders of the Co ordinate Bench for A.Y. 1994- 05 and 1993-94. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that during the year under consideration only incremental liability was there towards payment of pension under the VRS scheme. There is no need of any actuarial valuation certificates. Therefore, the directions of the Tribunal have r....