In pursuance of an agreement . between the assessee-respondent and another firm L & ·Co., by which, L agreed to assist the respondent in c procuring coal for export whenever asked to do so and not to export any coal during the subsistence of the agreement, L supp1ied various quanti- ties of coal to the respondent and tm respondent made .payments as per the agreement. The respondent claimed the payments as admisstuk expenditure under s. 10(2) (xv) of thi> Income-tax Act. 1922, duting the relevant assessment years. The Department held that they were payments. to secure a monopoly and were therefore not allowable as reve11ue •x· penditure. The Tribunal found that the respondent did not acquire any D monopoly rights, that the payments were only made to carry on trade in a more facile and profitable mannel', that the arrangement was a temporary measure liable to be terminated at will, that the respondent did not derive any advantage of an enduring character and that therefot e. the· expenditure was attributable to revenue and not to capital. and held in favour of the assessec. The High Court, on reference, agreing with the· findings of the Tribunal and holding that the consideration was not ouid once for all but was related to uncertain shipments to be mad, decided io· E favour of the assessee.
