DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, NASHIK vs. MAHAKALESHWAR TOLLWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED, UJJAIN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the 'right to collect toll' is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. Previous ITAT decisions consistently supported this view.
What were the facts?
The assessee company claimed depreciation on the 'right to collect toll' as an intangible asset, incurred for a Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) project. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim, treating the expenditure as amortizable over the concession period.
What were the issues?
Whether the 'right to collect toll' is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show listHide 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.
- Navnitlal C. Javeri v. K.K. Sen230 citing56 ITR 198 · 1965 · SC
- ACIT v. Progressive Constructions Ltd.63 citing92 Taxmann.com 104 · 2018 · ITAT
- ACIT, Circle 10(2), Hyderabad v. Progressive Construction Ltd.14 citing191 TTJ 549 · 2018 · ITAT
- Bombay in CIT v. Puja Prints12 citing43 Taxmann.com 247 · 2014 · HC
- Asstt. CIT v. Ashoka Infraways (P.) Ltd.8 citing33 Taxmann.com 499 · 2013 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI
आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�/ Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु$/ Concerned CIT 4.आयकरआयु$- अपील / CIT (A) 5. िवभागीय�ितिनिध,आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद/ DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड*फाइल / Guard file. By order UE COPY
Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Date 1. Draft dictated on 20.12.2022 2. Draft placed before the author 21.12.2022 3. Draft placed before the other Member 4. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 5. Order uploaded on 6. File sent to the Bench Clerk 7. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date of dispatch of Order.
More judgments on Section 32(1)(ii)
- Msrdc Sea Link Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -4…ITA 3693/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Tata Communications Ltd, Mumbai vs DCIT 1(3)(2), MumbaiITA 977/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- DCIT 1(3)(2), Mumbai vs Tata Communications Ltd, MumbaiITA 830/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- Baleshwar Kharagpur Expressway Limited… vs PCIT-6, MumbaiITA 5714/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Bank of India, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, MumbaiITA 2810/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026