2017 (2) TMI 456

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hav Kulkarni, Advocates ORDER The question of law framed in this case is as follows: - "Whether the sum of Rs. 200 lakhs received by the assessee under the agreement is rightly held as a capital receipt not liable to tax or is it a business income as held by the CIT (Appeals)?" The assessee declared Rs. 57,25,510/- as its total income; it mentioned about a strategic alliance agre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the assessee. Learned counsel for the revenue urges that the impugned order is erroneous and relies upon the terms of the agreements. It is submitted that there was nothing in the agreement which barred the assessee from carrying on its business; rather it merely agreed to place an embargo upon the exercise of its rights including distribution rights for a period of ten years for which one lum....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ner of Income Tax, (2011) 332 ITR 602 (SC). In the present case, as is evident from the factual discussion, the assessee along with several others entered into a strategic alliance agreement on 14.10.1994. This Court is not concerned with the stipulations in the strategic alliance agreement per se but rather with the other agreement entered into between the assessee and BBLIL on the same day. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y business of marketing and selling ice cream, ice lollies and dairy and non dairy based frozen desserts for ten years from the effective date, directly or indirectly......". The Revenue's contention is that the assessee never really went out of business but rather it agreed to suspend its right to market, sell and distribute ice creams and related products. This Court is of the opinion that....