S.28(va): Business income- Non-Resident —Non-compete fee — Negative covenant for three years only and not permanently- Receipts is taxable as business income but not taxable in India in absence of any permanent establishment of non-Resident In India – There was no transfer of any capital asset hence not liable to capital gains tax – DTAA- India -United Kingdom [ S.45 2(47) Art. 7 (1) ]

S. 32 : Depreciation – Goodwill- Intangible asset-Goodwill will fall under the expression ‘or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature’ hence depreciation is available on genuine goodwill. Whether there is transfer of goodwill and valuation done by the assessee is erroneous has to be decided by division Bench , accordingly the matter is sent back to division Bench .

S.254(1):Appellate Tribunal- Tribunal has no power of enhancement- Tribunal cannot take back benefits granted to assessee by Assessing Officer . Therefore, direction of Tribunal to Assessing Officer to determine depreciation or business loss of each year and carry forward lower of two for adjustment under section 115JA, which would result in enhancement of assessment, was not justified. [ S.115JA]

S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Stay – Mere pendency of an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) was no ground to state that there should be stay on recovery of tax demanded. No prima facie case is established for grant of an unconditional stay- Direction of AO to deposit 20 percent of tax demanded was held to be justified [ S.220 ]

S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Modes of recovery – No coercive steps should be taken for recovery of outstanding tax demand, till expiry of period of limitation for filing an appeal.[ S.253 ]

S. 226 : Collection and recovery – Stay -On payment of 20% of original tax demanded , notice issued u/s 226(3) of the Act is directed to be vacated . [ S.220 , 226(3) ]

S. 194A : Deduction at source – Interest other than interest on securities –Co –operative society- Banking business-Interest paid to members on time deposits is not required to deduct tax at source .

S. 92C : Transfer pricing -Comparable- when the Tribunal accepted the plea that functionally dissimilarity, remanding the matter to TPO was held to be not justified – Tribunal is directed to hear the appeal on merit [ S.254(1) ]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing -Arm’s length price- When there is a difference in level of capacity utilization of assessee and level of capacity utilization of comparable, then adjustment would be required to be made to profit margin of comparable on account of difference in capacity utilization in terms of rule 10-B (1)(e)(iii)

S.37(1):Business expenditure – Capital or revenue – Expenses on restructuring of business is held to be allowable as revenue expenditure.Sale of one of unit- Expendiure is allowable .