TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g indicated in the balance sheet of the partnership firm, there could not be no goodwill available to the firm is an issue being urged for the first time before this Court. Therefore, in the absence of this issue being raised before the authorities under the Act, it will not be question arising from the case. There is nothing on record on facts to indicate that the amount received by the respondent is not goodwill. Therefore, the decision of this Court in Riyaz A. Sheikh (2013 (12) TMI 248 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) will apply wherein held amounts received on retirement by a partner is not subject to capital gains tax - Decided against Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 33 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 18-4-2018 - M.S. SANKLECHA SANDEEP K. SHINDE, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing that the said preposition laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Tribhuvandas G. Patel has not been disapproved by the Hon'ble Apex Court or other Courts as held by the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shevantibhai C. Mehta Vs. ITO (2004) 83 TTJ 542? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified that in not considering that in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Riyaz A. Sheikh, the retiring partner received the amount from partnership firm arising on transfer of goodwill, however, int eh case of Assessee there is no goodwill in the balance sheet of M/s. Landmark Development? (v) Whether on the facts and in the circumstan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer towards long term capital gain on transfer of goodwill? (b) This Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal upholding the order of the Tribunal that amounts received as goodwill on retirement from a partnership firm is not subject to capital gains tax in the hands of the retiring partner. This after consideration of all binding decisions which the Revenue seeks to rely upon including the decision of the Supreme Court in Tribhuvandas G. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (1999) 236 ITR 515. (c) Mr. Malhotra, learned Counsel appearing in support of the appeal submits that the decision of this Court in Riyaz A. Sheikh (supra) will not apply as the amounts received by the respondent was not on account of goodwi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the amounts received on retirement on account of goodwill by the retiring partner will not be subjected to tax as capital gains in his hands. The question of cost of acquisition being NIL is a matter of computation of capital gains. This issue of computation would only come into play once it is held that the amounts received on account of goodwill by a partner is liable to capital gains tax under the Act. Therefore, this submission also has no merits. (f) So far as the second objection is concerned that the order of this Court in Riyaz A Sheikh (supra) did not properly appreciate the law, we note it was rendered on 26th February, 2013. The aforesaid order of this Court would have been applied by all authorities within the State to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g of an appeal for low tax effect from an order of a coordinate bench of this Court would not result in the order loosing its status as a binding precedent. (h) The rule of law would oblige us to follow decisions of a coordinate bench in the absence of any distinction on facts as the law has to be applied equally to all concerned. This would be the position in the absence of it being stayed, till the same is set aside and / or modified by a higher forum. (i) In the above view, question nos. 1 to 4 which deal with the same issue, do not give rise to any substantial question of law as the impugned order has merely followed the decision of this Court in Riyaz A. Sheikh (supra). Thus, not entertained. 4. Regarding question nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
