9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .03.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad in ITA No.1211/Ahd/2007 and 1330/Ahd/2007. Both these appeals were admitted vide common order dated 19.01.2010 for determination of the following substantial questions of law: "Tax Appeal No. 1905 of 2008 1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has not exceeded its jurisdiction while passing the order dated 28.3.2008 and thereby deleting the addition sustained by the CIT(A), being addition on account of goodwill of Rs. 47,02,500/- which was shown in the agreement and Rs. 4,70,25,000/- being 30% of the value of Rs. 15,67,50,000/- ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has correctly appreciated the facts available on record so as to delete the addition sustained by the CIT(A), being a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use of any information or knowhow for the manufacturing of such products either itself or through anybody else. Subsequently, the assessee company entered into three different Agreements for sale of Copyrights, Goodwill and restrain on use of Technical Knowhow. The assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was finalized on 31.03.1997 determining total income at Rs. 12,83,17,670/- as against the returned income of Rs. 3,11,66,030/- . 6. Against the order of assessment, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). Vide order dated 25.07.1997, the CIT(A) allowed the appeal of assessee in part. Being dissatisfied with the said order, the Department preferred appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 04.02.2005, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Estate Duty, Kanpur, [1981] 132 ITR 421. (b) McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, [1985] 154 ITR 148. (c) Continental Construction Ltd. v. Commissioner of Incometax, [1992] 195 ITR 81. 10. Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the assessee, submitted that the CIT(A) seriously erred in modifying the effect of the three Agreements, which were, actually, entered into between two unaccounted parties at arms length and the payments which were received in foreign exchange through normal banking channels, which, incidentally, involved at least a tacit approval by the Reserve Bank of India also, more so, without even alleging any sort of collusion, etc. 10.1 It was submitted that even in the context of the thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has not committed any error in allowing the appeal filed by assessee. Consequently, we answer all the questions raised in Tax Appeal Nos.1905/2008 and 1906/2008 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 14. Insofar as the question raised in Tax Appeal No.1605/2009 is concerned, it appears that the impugned penalty was levied by the A.O. as a result of addition of Rs. 8,30,77,000/- made by the A.O. towards capital gains on account of transfer of Goodwill. However, subsequently, the said addition towards capital gains on account of transfer of Goodwill was deleted by the Tribunal vide order dated 28.03.2008 and therefore, the penalty levied with reference to the said addition was cancell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
