Notification

  • Image

    Webinar | Angel Investing in India: Mistakes First-Time Investors Avoid

    Book your seat

Settlements Beyond Courtroom Walls: Tax Impact

Get in touch with us

    Your information is confidential and secure


    AI Summary
    • Out of court settlement receipts are classified as revenue or capital receipts under the Income Tax Act 1961, and this classification determines whether the amount is taxable.
    • Revenue receipts, such as compensation for loss of trading stock or loss of profits, arise from routine business operations and are generally taxable unless specifically exempted.
    • Capital receipts, such as compensation for diminution in asset value or termination of a business, do not arise from normal operations and are generally not taxable unless the Income Tax Act provides otherwise.
    • Compensatory payments made to settle claims for business losses or breach of contract are treated as allowable expenses in the hands of the paying party.
    • Penal payments made to settle claims involving regulatory violations or statutory non-compliance are not treated as allowable business expenses.
    • Under the GST Act, the taxable event is supply of goods or services, and a transaction qualifies as supply only if it meets six parameters, including consideration, furtherance of business, and taxable territory.
    • Compensation paid in an out of court settlement generally does not qualify as a supply under GST and is therefore not liable to GST.
    • Compensation paid specifically for breach of contract may be treated as consideration for supply of service and taxed under GST, whereas compensation paid for other reasons is generally not taxable for lack of mutual consideration.
    • Damages or liquidated damages received in a settlement may be treated as a taxable supply of service under the GST provision covering an obligation to refrain from an act or to tolerate an act or situation.

    Get in touch with us

      Your information is confidential and secure


      The following article offers an understanding of the funds received and disbursed by involved parties in a settlement outside the courtroom. It also outlines how such funds are handled according to the Income Tax Act and GST Act.

      1.Treatment as per Income tax in the hands of a recipient

      2.Treatment as per Income tax in the hands of the settling party

      3.Understanding GST applicability on the same

      4.Case laws

      5.Conclusion

      Treatment as per Income tax in the hands of a recipient

      In the realm of taxation concerning out-of-court settlements, a pivotal aspect to consider is the categorization of receipts into revenue and capital under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”). This distinction helps identify whether the settlement amount is taxable or not.

      Revenue receipts

      • Arise from the regular and routine business operations of an entity and are generally recurring in nature.
      • In out of court settlement, compensation for loss of trading stock or loss of profits can be considered as Revenue receipts.
      • Generally, revenue receipts are taxable unless specifically exempted.
      • Examples – amounts received for sale of goods, interest on loans, rental income.

      Capital Receipts

      • Do not arise from the normal business operations and usually one-time receipts and are not recurrent.
      • In out of court settlement, compensation for damages leading to the diminution of the asset’s value or for the termination of a business can be considered as Capital Receipts.
      • Generally not taxable, unless it’s mentioned otherwise under the IT Act
      • Examples – Receipts include sale proceeds from selling an asset, money received from a share issue.

      Distinguishing between compensatory and punitive nature is crucial for determining if compensation payments can be treated as allowable expenses. The following points outline this differentiation clearly.

      Compensatory Expense

      • Paid damages or losses in business operations are compensatory expenses.
      • Paid to end a lawsuit for alleged damages or harm caused or payments to businesses for losses incurred due to contract breaches are compensatory expenses.
      • Examples include Payment for breach of contract or business losses.

      Penal Expense

      • Paof toward fines or penalties levied for legal or regulatory violations are penal expenses.
      • In out of court settlement context, amounts paid to end a lawsuit for regulatory violations or payments for statutory non-compliances are penal in nature.
      • Common examples include fines for legal infringements or regulatory non-compliances

      Untangling GST Applicability in Out-of-Court Settlements

      The taxable event in GST is supply of goods or services or both. Hence its important to understand the meaning and scope of “Supply” under GST which clearly defined in the following 6 parameter

      1. Supply of goods or services. Supply of anything other than goods or services does not attract GST

      2. Supply should be made for a consideration

      3. Supply should be made in the course or furtherance of business

      4. Supply should be made by a taxable person

      5. Supply should be a taxable supply

       6. Supply should be made within the taxable territory

      Compensation paid in out of court settlements does not qualify as a ‘supply’ under the GST regime. Therefore, it is not liable to GST. However, it’s vital to analyze the nature and purpose of the compensation to ascertain the exact GST implications.

      Taxability of compensation paid under GST depends on whether the compensation is for

      • breach of contract – be considered as consideration for supply of a service and would be taxable under GST
      • for any other reason – it would not be taxable under GST as they cannot be treated as any sort of service and they lack the element of mutual consideration
      • For damages / liquidated damages – may be considered as supply of goods or services considering such receipt fall within the ambit of ‘agreeing to obligation to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act’.

      Case Laws

      Under Income Tax:

      Commissioner of Income Tax v. D.P. Sandu Bros., Supreme Court

      Compensation received due to the termination of a dealership agreement is a capital receipt and hence not taxable.

      Kettlewell Bullen & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Supreme Court

      Compensation received in lieu of a trading asset is a revenue receipt. But if for the loss of a profit-making structure, it’s a capital receipt.

      Commissioner of Income Tax v. Panbari Tea Co. Ltd., Supreme  Court

      Compensation received for the loss of a source of income is considered a capital receipt and is not taxable.

      Under GST:

      Bai Mamubai Trust, VithaldasLaxmidas Bhatia, Smt. InduVithaldas Bhatia vs. Suchitra, Bombay High Court

      GST is not payable on damages/compensation paid for a legal injury as payment lacking the element of mutuality of consideration.

      Conclusion

      •Classification of receipts, whether revenue or capital, especially in the context of out-of-court settlements, might require a detailed analysis of the nature and purpose of the receipt.

      •Decisions from judiciary and expert advice can aid in providing clarity.

      •In practice, nature of receipt shall be determined by extensive scrutiny of pleadings in suit and / or recitals contained in the settlement agreement and careful drafting will be quintessential.

      About the Author
      Priya Kapasi Shah
      Priya Kapasi Shah social-linkedin
      Associate Partner | Tax & Regulatory | priya.k@treelife.in

      Heads Treelife’s Financial Advisory practice, specializing in investment structuring, cross-border transactions, and tax and regulatory advisory. Also leads on AIF setups and advisory services for GIFT IFSC.

      We Are Problem Solvers. And Take Accountability.

      Related Posts

      Data Fiduciary vs Data Processor: Redrafting Your B2B Vendor DPAs Under the DPDP Act 2023
      Data Fiduciary vs Data Processor: Redrafting Your B2B Vendor DPAs Under the DPDP Act 2023

      Most Indian B2B contracts signed before 2024 were not written with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 in mind....

      Learn MoreLearn More
      Who Owns the Prompt? Modifying Employee IP Assignment Clauses for the GenAI Era
      Who Owns the Prompt? Modifying Employee IP Assignment Clauses for the GenAI Era

      Most Indian employment agreements assign to the employer everything an employee creates, develops, or invents during employment. That clause was...

      Learn MoreLearn More
      The AI Indemnity Trap: Negotiating Liability When Third-Party Algorithms Hallucinate
      The AI Indemnity Trap: Negotiating Liability When Third-Party Algorithms Hallucinate

      Every founder who has embedded a third-party AI model into their product has read an indemnity clause that sounds reassuring....

      Learn MoreLearn More

      For Customer Support

      Mumbai | Delhi |
      Bangalore | GIFT City

      Speak to Us!

      We respond within 60 minutes.

        Your information is confidential and secure


        Let's talk.

        We've seen most founder problems before. Tell us yours.






          Typically responds within 4 hours
          Or reach out directly