During the year the assessee received liquidated damages of Rs. 3,22,94,880 and claimed exclusion thereof from the taxable income on the ground that it was a capital receipt, since it had been received from the suppliers of capital goods in relation to delayed supply of such capital goods. The Assessing Officer charged the sum under section 28(iv) of the Act as a revenue receipt further observing that the assessee had failed to submit necessary details of the parties and other documentary evidence to substantiate that liquidity damages were connected with supply of capital goods. On the basis of the remand report on additional evidence furnished by the assessee, the additions were confirmed by the Dispute Resolution Panel. On appeal the Tribunal held that  the entire basis of the assessee’s contention was that agreements were not for supply of any machinery, but of design, transfer of technology know-how, patent, etc., which were in the nature of intangible assets. Even intangible assets are capital goods and a specific rate of depreciation is provided in the Act. The damages were for intangible assets and intangible assets were also capital goods. Therefore, any liquidated damages received are capital receipts. The Assessing Officer was to delete the addition of Rs. 32,29,40,880. (AY.2014-15)