ITAT Jaipur Judgments — January 2025

The Tribunal allowed the claim for amortization of surface rights, finding that the assessee had acquired an enduring business right and that the expenditure was not claimed by RSMML. However, the claim for depreciation on intangible assets was dismissed as the assessee failed to demonstrate the existence of such an asset benefiting them.

The Tribunal held that the amortization of surface rights was allowable as the assessee had acquired an enduring business right and the expenditure was not claimed by the intermediary. However, the claim for depreciation on intangible assets was dismissed as the assessee failed to demonstrate the creation of any such asset benefiting its business.

The Tribunal found that there was a dispute regarding a specific weight of jewellery for which the addition was confirmed by the CIT(A). To ensure equity and justice, the issue was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing sufficient cause and the principle of advancing substantial justice. On merits, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not justified in taxing 8% on Rs. 33,68,166/- as it represented re-deposits from cash balance and earlier withdrawals, not fresh turnover.

The ITAT noted that the CIT(E)'s observations were made without sufficient verification, especially considering the trust's long-standing charitable activities and previous exemptions. The tribunal directed the CIT(E) to provide one more opportunity for the assessee to furnish details and conduct independent verification.