This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Payment for warding off competition in business even to a rival dealer will constitute capital expenditure and to hold them capital expenditure it is not necessary that non-compete fee is paid to create monopoly rights
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Tecumseh India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi), Appeal No: ITA No. 3759/Del/2003
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Delhi
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
CASE LAWS DETAILS
DECIDED BY: ITAT, DELHI BENCH, SPECIAL BENCH, NEW DELHI, IN THE CASE OF: Tecumseh India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT, APPEAL NO: ITA No. 3759/Del/2003, DECIDED ON July 30, 2010
ORDER
PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This Special Bench is constituted by the order of Hon’ble President dated 2nd September, 2008 to decide the following questions:-
1. “That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A)-IXI, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] erred in upholding disallowance of Rs. 2,65,00,000 being the non-compete fee paid to M/s Whirlpool of In...
