Income Tax

Non-compete fee held as allowable revenue expenditure u/s 37(1) of IT Act – Supreme Court

Payment made by the assessee as non-compete fee was an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act –Supreme Court

In a recent judgment, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that non-compete fee payment made to essentially keep a potential competitor out of the same business cannot be considered as acquisition of any capital asset or bringing into existence a new profit earning apparatus.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4950 (2025) (12) abcaus.in SC

The core issue for consideration in relevant appeals was whether noncompete fee paid by the assessee is a revenue expenditure or capital expenditure?

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that non-compete compensation from the stand point of the payer of such compensation is so paid in anticipation that absence of a competition from the other party may secure a benefit to the party paying the compensation. However, there is no certainty that such benefit would accrue. Further, notwithstanding such arrangement, the payer assesee may still not achieve the desired result.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that in the present case, on account of payment of non-compete fee, the assessee had not acquired any new business and there is no addition to the profit making apparatus of the assessee. The assets remained the same. Such payment made by the appellant assessee did not create a monopoly of the appellant over the business of the goods. Payment was made only to ensure that the appellant operated the business more efficiently and profitably.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that payment made by the appellant assessee as non-compete fee was an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. 

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

ITAT allows credit balance adjustment for addition of deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e)

ITAT allows adjustment of credit balance for the purposes of addition of deemed dividend as per section 2(22)(e) In a…

9 minutes ago
  • Income Tax

Addition u/s 50C deleted based on FMV as per CA report under Rule 11UA(1)(b)

Addition u/s 50C deleted based on FMV in CA report under Rule 11UA(1)(b) as AO applied wrong rule Rule 11UA(2)…

2 hours ago
  • Excise/Custom

Procedure to handle export cargo originating from SEZ due to closure of Strait of Hormuz

Procedure to handle export cargo originating from SEZ in view of disruption in maritime routes due to closure of the…

1 day ago
  • ICAI

ICAI AQMM review to be applicable to Practice Units which are subject to Peer Review

ICAI Audit Quality Maturity Model (AQMM) review shall be applicable to Practice Units which are subject to Peer Review and…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT allows remuneration paid by wives of CA partners for their services rendered in firm

Remuneration paid by CA firm to wives of CA partners for their services rendered allowed in the absence of any…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

When assessee did not opt yes or no to receive notices by email, such notices were no service

When assessee did not opt yes or no to receive notices by email, such notices amounted to no service In…

2 days ago