2009 (12) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... facts necessary for disposal of the appeals may be noticed in brief. The assessee, a registered firm, received Rs.85,000/- as infringement of copyright for the assessment year 1985-1986. Similarly, for the assessment year 1986-1987 it received Rs.25,000/-. The assessing officer and the first appellate authority as well rejected the contention of the assessee that the said amounts were received as capital receipt. But the Tribunal in second appeals referred to above filed by the assessee on the basis of the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT Vs. Sirpur Paper Mills (1978) 112 ITR 776 by a common order has held that the said amounts are not revenue receipts but are capital income and therefore, not liable to be taxed. 3. Challenging the order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee in its profit and loss account, but at the same time the assessee claimed it to be non-taxable being capital receipt. The assessing authority has found that there is no doubt that an amount of compensation in shape of infringement of copyright which has been received by assessee Firm is related to its business and on account of damages. The said fact has not been adverted at all by the Tribunal who proceeded to decide the matter almost in a summary manner in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sirpur Paper Mills (supra). 7. However, we find that in the aforesaid case, the Supreme Court has made following observation:- "It is now well settled that if any injury is inflicted on the trading, so to say a hole in....