Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: due date for vat payment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: TDS :: VAT Audit :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: form 3cd :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: VAT RATES :: empanelment :: articles on VAT and GST in India
 
 
From the Courts »
 Ravneet Takhar Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax Ix And Ors.
 Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax
 Formula One World Championship Limited Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, International Taxation-3 And Anr.
 Commissioner Of Income Tax International Taxation-3 Delhi Vs. Formula One World Championship Ltd. And Anr.
 Reliance Communications Ltd vs. DDIT (ITAT Mumbai)
  Sushila Devi vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)
 Ashok Prapann Sharma vs. CIT (Supreme Court)a
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
 M.K.Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax-06
 Arshia Ahmed Qureshi Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-21

Shri Rakesh Dungarmal Tainwala 71, Kalpataru, Nutan Laxmi Society, JVPD Scheme Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400049 Vs. DCIT, Range 8(3) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400020
June, 21st 2012
                IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                           "D" Bench, Mumbai

                 Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President
               and Shri Rajendra Singh, Accountant Member


                           ITA No.3221/Mum/2011
                          (Assessment Year: 2007-08)

     Shri Rakesh Dungarmal Tainwala          DCIT, Range 8(3)
     71, Kalpataru, Nutan Laxmi          Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road
     Society, JVPD Scheme                    Mumbai 400020
     Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400049
     PAN - AAAPT 9300 J
                  Appellant                           Respondent

                    Appellant by:     Shri J.P. Bairagra
                    Respondent by:    Shri C.G.K. Naik

                    Date of Hearing:       19.06.2012
                    Date of Pronouncement: 19.06.2012


                                   ORDER





Per D. Manmohan, V.P.

      This appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated
24.03.2011 passed by the CIT(A) ­ 18, Mumbai and it pertains to
assessment year 2007-08.

2.     The following grounds were urged by the assessee: -

      "1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in
          confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in holding that
          consideration of Rs.2 Crores received as Non-Compete fees is
          revenue receipt and accordingly chargeable under section 28(va)
          of Income Tax Act, 1961 as against returned by the appellant as
          long term capital gain under Sec. 55(2) of the Income Tax Act.
      2.   The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further erred
           in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in not allowing
           deduction of Rs.2 crores under section 54F of the Income Tax Act
           against the long term capital gain taxable under section 55(2) of
           the Income Tax Act."
                                       2                  ITA No.3221/Mum/2011
                                                  Shri Rakesh Dungarmal Tainwala

3.    Assessee is a promoter and shareholder of Tainwala Polycontainers
Ltd. (TPL). Assessee received a sum of `2 crores by way of non-compete fees
from M/s. Time Packaging Ltd. In the return filed for the assessment year
under consideration assessee claimed exemption under section 54F of the
Act by purchasing a residential property. It was contended that the non-
compete fees received is a capital receipt assessable to tax under the head
`Capital Gains'. The AO as well as the CIT(A) were of the opinion that
provisions of section 28(va) are applicable to the instant case and the
impugned sum is assessable to tax as revenue receipt and accordingly the
AO completed the assessment, which was affirmed by the CIT(A).




4.    At the time of hearing the learned counsel for the assessee fairly
submitted that identical issue has come up in the case of Ramesh D.
Tainwala in ITA No. 3853/Mum/2010 wherein the ITAT "D" Bench Mumbai
concluded that provisions of section 28(va)(a) would apply and consequently
the amount received by that assessee would be chargeable to tax as business
income and not under the head capital gains. The learned counsel for the
assessee admitted that despite the case of the assessee that non-compete fees
is assessable to tax under the head `Long Term Capital Gains', in the light of
the aforesaid decision the issue stands covered against the assessee.

5.    On the other hand, the learned D.R. relied upon the orders passed by
the tax authorities as well as the decision of the ITAT (supra)

6.    In the light of the order passed by the ITAT "D" Bench Mumbai in the
case Ramesh D. Tainwala (supra) we hold that the order passed by the
learned CIT(A) is in accordance with law and accordingly the appeal filed by
the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th June 2012.

               Sd/-                                      Sd/-
         (Rajendra Singh)                           (D. Manmohan)
        Accountant Member                           Vice President

Mumbai, Dated: 19th June 2012
                                       3                   ITA No.3221/Mum/2011
                                                   Shri Rakesh Dungarmal Tainwala

Copy to:

   1.   The   Appellant
   2.   The   Respondent
   3.   The   CIT(A) ­ 18, Mumbai
   4.   The   CIT­ 8, Mumbai City
   5.   The   DR, "D" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai

                                                      By Order

//True Copy//
                                                   Assistant Registrar
                                           ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
n.p.
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Privacy Policy

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions