Sanjay Karol, J.

The present appeal stands admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

“Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was correct in holding that the compensation of Rs.2,25,99,964 representing compensation received by the appellant towards cancellation of the SPA was a revenue receipt taxable in the hands of the appellant?”

2. In relation to the assessment year 2008-09, M/s RFCL Limited (hereinafter referred to as the assessee), filed return with the Income Tax Department. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices issued under the provisions of Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. Vide order dated 28.12.2010 (Annexure P-1), the Assessing Officer, reassessed the income by disallowing (i) the depreciation of goodwill and (ii) claim of capital receipt. The order stood affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Shimla, in terms of order dated 12.12.2011 (Annexure P-2). Findings of fact returned by such authorities, on the point in