Held that That the Tribunal after considering the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) examined the settlement which was executed between the assessee and the U. K. company which showed that the compensation was given on account of non-achievement of performance parameters. After noting the relevant clauses in the settlement agreement, the Tribunal held that the condition specified in section 43(1) of the Act for directing the actual cost from value of the machines were applicable to the compensation amount paid to the assessee. There was no error in the approach of the Tribunal or that of the Commissioner (Appeals). (AY. 2005-06)
PCIT v. XPRO India Ltd. (2022) 446 ITR 668 / 217 DTR 265/ 328 CTR 593/ 289 Taxman 283 (Cal.)(HC)
S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Capital or revenue-Compensation received-Non-achievement of performance parameters-Capital receipt. [S. 28(i), 43(1)]