ACIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), DELHI vs. M/S HYDERABAD RING ROAD PROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 3599/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the 'right to get annuity' for constructing a road project does not create an 'intangible asset' under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, distinguishing previous rulings. However, it upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow amortization based on the provisional certificate.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Special Purpose Vehicle for a road project, claimed depreciation on an intangible asset representing its right to receive annuity. The Assessing Officer rejected this claim, and the CIT(A) partly allowed it by permitting amortization based on a provisional completion certificate.

What were the issues?

Whether the right to receive annuity in a BOT project constitutes an intangible asset eligible for depreciation, and whether amortization can be claimed based on a provisional completion certificate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Chinu Bhasin, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Hearing: 15.01.2026Pronounced: 11.03.2026

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 4090/DEL/2025
CO No. 81/DEL/2025
ITA No. 3599/DEL/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ITA No. 4090/DEL/2025 CO No. 81/DEL/2025 Hyderabad Ring Road Project Vs ACIT [A.Y. 2017-18] PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

-

The above captioned appeals by the assessee and Revenue and Cross Objection by the assessee are preferred against the separate orders of the NFAC dated 18.03.2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Since the underlying appeals and cross objection were heard together and the facts in issue

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 32(1)(ii)

All 565 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →