Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT

345 ITR 421High Court2012#1177 most cited

What is Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Business contracts and commercial rights of similar nature qualify as intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) and are eligible for depreciation. The decision also affirms that goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation.

97

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT · Areva T&D · 345 ITR 421 · Section 32(1)(ii) · depreciation intangible assets · depreciation goodwill · depreciation business contracts · depreciation commercial rights · slump sale · going concern

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(2AB)Section 90Section 143(3)Section 170Section 234D

Issues it is cited on

business transfer agreementsection 170depreciation on goodwillsection 32(2)section 35(1)(i)section 2(43)section 32(1)(ii)slump salegoing concernsection 31(1)commercial rightsdepreciation on software

Judgments citing Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT

HYDERABAD RING ROAD PROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,INDIA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE

In the result Appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4090/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Chinu Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…25 Hyderabad Ring Road Project Vs ACIT [A.Y. 2017-18] High Court in the following cases: (i)Techno Shares & Stocks v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC);(ii) CIT v/s Smifs Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC)and (iii) Areva T. and D India Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2012] 345 ITR 421 (Delhi High Court). 18. The ld counsel of the assessee further distinguished the Madras High Court decision by stating that firstly, the scope of work in L & T Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd case was construction, operation and maintenance of the respective toll bridges while in the assessee’s case it encompasses Design, Construction, De…

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

In the result Appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3599/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Chinu Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…25 Hyderabad Ring Road Project Vs ACIT [A.Y. 2017-18] High Court in the following cases: (i)Techno Shares & Stocks v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC);(ii) CIT v/s Smifs Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC)and (iii) Areva T. and D India Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2012] 345 ITR 421 (Delhi High Court). 18. The ld counsel of the assessee further distinguished the Madras High Court decision by stating that firstly, the scope of work in L & T Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd case was construction, operation and maintenance of the respective toll bridges while in the assessee’s case it encompasses Design, Construction, De…

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 294/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2026AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 250Section 254Section 37Section 90

…usiness. Without acquisition of these contracts, the assessee would have been required to start the business from scratch and undergo a long gestation period. 25.2 Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Areva T & D India Ltd. 345 ITR 421 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323, the learned CIT(A) held that business contracts form part of "business or commercial rights of similar nature” as envisaged under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. These rights function as tools of trade which enable the assessee to carry on business without interruption. Acc…

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 293/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 250Section 254Section 37Section 90

…usiness. Without acquisition of these contracts, the assessee would have been required to start the business from scratch and undergo a long gestation period. 25.2 Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Areva T & D India Ltd. 345 ITR 421 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323, the ITA Nos.290 - 294/Bang/2025 Page 19 of 53 learned CIT(A) held that business contracts form part of “business or commercial rights of similar nature” as envisaged under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. These rights function as tools of trade which enable the assessee to…

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 292/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 250Section 254Section 37Section 90

…usiness. Without acquisition of these contracts, the assessee would have been required to start the business from scratch and undergo a long gestation period. 25.2 Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Areva T & D India Ltd. 345 ITR 421 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323, the ITA Nos.290 - 294/Bang/2025 Page 19 of 53 learned CIT(A) held that business contracts form part of “business or commercial rights of similar nature” as envisaged under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. These rights function as tools of trade which enable the assessee to…

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 291/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 250Section 254Section 37Section 90

…usiness. Without acquisition of these contracts, the assessee would have been required to start the business from scratch and undergo a long gestation period. 25.2 Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Areva T & D India Ltd. 345 ITR 421 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323, the learned CIT(A) held that business contracts form part of “business or commercial rights of similar nature” as envisaged under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. These rights function as tools of trade which enable the assessee to carry on business without interruption. Acc…

EDGEVERVE SYSTEMS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 290/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Kincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 250Section 254Section 37Section 90

…usiness. Without acquisition of these contracts, the assessee would have been required to start the business from scratch and undergo a long gestation period. 25.2 Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Areva T & D India Ltd. 345 ITR 421 and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323, the ITA Nos.290 - 294/Bang/2025 Page 19 of 53 learned CIT(A) held that business contracts form part of “business or commercial rights of similar nature” as envisaged under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. These rights function as tools of trade which enable the assessee to…

VIACOM 18, MEDIA PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-8, MUMBAI

ITA 2591/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal/Ms. MokshaFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 32

…ompany). The assessee submits that it is eligible for depreciation @25% on the written down value of the aforesaid goodwill based on the following decisions: • CIT, Kolkata v. Smifs Securities (24 taxтапп.com 222(SC)] • Areva T & D India Ltd vs DCIT ((2012) 345 ITR 421 (Delhi High Court) • Viacom 18 vs ACIT (ITA No. 7336/Mum/2012) [Mumbai Tribunal] • B. Raveendran Pillai vs CIT ((2010) 194 Taxman 477 (Kerala HC)] • CIT vs. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd (2011) 198 TAXMAN 104 (Delhi HC) • CIT vs. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd [(2009) 34 SOT 171 (Delhi Tribunal)) • Skyline Caterers (P.) Ltd.…

ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. GANDHI REALITY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED, RAJKOT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 110/RJT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am. & Dinesh Mohan Sinha, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Ld. CIT. (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 230

…ishna Drugs Ltd. (ITA 198/Hyd/2011) (v)Zuari Cement Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, [TS-5823- ITAT-2016(Hyderabad)-0] (vi)Cosmos Cooperative Bank Limited vs. DCIT (TS-47-ITAT-2014) (Pune Tribunal) (vii)Areva T & D India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 345 ITR 421 (Delhi HC) (viii)Toyo Engineering India Limited v DCIT, BOM (33 taxmann.com 560) (Mumbai) (ix)UOI vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan (263 ITR 706) (SC) (x)Vodafone International Holdings B.V. v. Union of India [2012] 341 ITR 1 (SC) (xi)CIT v. Motors & General Stores (P.) Ltd [1967] 66 ITR 692 (SC) Gandhi Reality(I) Pvt. Ltd (xii)Dalmia Power Ltd. v. ACIT…

S S GROUP P.LTD,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as above

ITA 7691/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.7691/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No.8950/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 M/S. S S Group (P) Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Rra Taxindia Income Tax, Circle-4(1) D-28, South Extension Part-1 Vs. Income Tax Office, New Delhi-110049 Hsiidc Building, Pan: Aapcs5288Q Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/03/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am Since Issues Involved In These Appeals Were Identical; Hence, These Cases Were Heard Together. Accordingly, These Appeals Are Being Disposed Off By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 234ASection 32(1)Section 40A(3)Section 43(6)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7691/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 ITA No.8950/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17 M/s. S S Group (P) Ltd. Assistant Commissioner of C/O RRA TAXINDIA Income Tax, Circle-4(1) D-28, South Extension Part-1 Vs. Income Tax Office, New Delhi-110049 HSIIDC Building, PAN: AAPCS5288Q Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT DR Date of Hearing 18/12/2024 Date…

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME , CIRLCE 14(1)(2)TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2833/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 2829 to 2833/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ass./Dy. CIT, Circle 14(1)(2), Ltd, Room No. 455, 4th floor, 4th floor, A Wing, Allcargo House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400020. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN NO. AADCG 2096 A Appellant Respondent : Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Assessee by Mr. Fenil Bhatt & Mr. C.C. Dangi : Ms. R A Dhyani, CIT-DR Revenue by : 19/02/2024 Date of Hear…

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2832/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2016 - 2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 2829 to 2833/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ass./Dy. CIT, Circle 14(1)(2), Ltd, Room No. 455, 4th floor, 4th floor, A Wing, Allcargo House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400020. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN NO. AADCG 2096 A Appellant Respondent : Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Assessee by Mr. Fenil Bhatt & Mr. C.C. Dangi : Ms. R A Dhyani, CIT-DR Revenue by : 19/02/2024 Date of Hear…

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2831/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 2829 to 2833/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ass./Dy. CIT, Circle 14(1)(2), Ltd, Room No. 455, 4th floor, 4th floor, A Wing, Allcargo House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400020. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN NO. AADCG 2096 A Appellant Respondent : Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Assessee by Mr. Fenil Bhatt & Mr. C.C. Dangi : Ms. R A Dhyani, CIT-DR Revenue by : 19/02/2024 Date of Hear…

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, In the result, appeal for AY 2013-14 is allowed partly for 14 is allowed partly for statistical purposes, purposes, appeal for AY 2014-15 is partly allowed, is partly allowed, appeal...

ITA 2830/MUM/2023[ASST YEAR 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 2829 to 2833/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ass./Dy. CIT, Circle 14(1)(2), Ltd, Room No. 455, 4th floor, 4th floor, A Wing, Allcargo House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400020. Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400098. PAN NO. AADCG 2096 A Appellant Respondent : Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Assessee by Mr. Fenil Bhatt & Mr. C.C. Dangi : Ms. R A Dhyani, CIT-DR Revenue by : 19/02/2024 Date of Hear…

GATI KINTETSU EXPRESS PVT. LTD,MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA AND MUMBAI

ITA 2829/MUM/2023[ASS YEAR 2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2024

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail ()

For Respondent: Mr. Madhur Agrawal
Section 143(3)Section 250

…urchase. Further, the Tribunal held that depreciation is allowable on goodwill arising pursuant to slump sale transaction. The Ld. counsel for the assessee further relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Areva T & D Ltd. v. DCIT (345 ITR 421) wherein the intangibles acquired pursuant to a slump sale agreement are held to be eligible for depreciation. 10. On the contrary, the Ld. DR relied on the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Borkar Packaging (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2010) 131 TTJ 99 (Panaji), Jeypore Sugar Co. Ltd. v. ACIT [2011] 9 taxmann.com 122 (Visak…

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMM. OF INCOME TAX -14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2451/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

…tted that the same would fall within the definition of intangible assets under section 32(1)(ii) i.e. "business of commercial rights of similar nature". The assessee relied on the following decisions in this regard – (i) Areva T and D India Ltd vs DCIT (2012) 345 ITR 421 (Del) (ii) Skyline Caterer (P) Ltd (2018) 118 TTJ 344 (Mum) (iii) Weizmann Forex Ltd (2013) 21 Taxmann.com 99 (iv) India Capital Markets (P) Ltd vs DCIT (2013) 56 SOT 32 (Mum) 14. The assessee further submitted that in the case of CIT vs Areva T and D India Ltd (2021) 129 taxmann.com 55 (Madras) where the depreciation on non- compete fee has bee…

WNS GLOBAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMM. OF INCOME TAX-14(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2450/MUM/2022[208-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

…tted that the same would fall within the definition of intangible assets under section 32(1)(ii) i.e. "business of commercial rights of similar nature". The assessee relied on the following decisions in this regard – (i) Areva T and D India Ltd vs DCIT (2012) 345 ITR 421 (Del) (ii) Skyline Caterer (P) Ltd (2018) 118 TTJ 344 (Mum) (iii) Weizmann Forex Ltd (2013) 21 Taxmann.com 99 (iv) India Capital Markets (P) Ltd vs DCIT (2013) 56 SOT 32 (Mum) 14. The assessee further submitted that in the case of CIT vs Areva T and D India Ltd (2021) 129 taxmann.com 55 (Madras) where the depreciation on non- compete fee has bee…

HARITA FEHRER LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CC - 2 (2),, CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2746/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…dated 29.07.2021). The Ld. AR, on the other hand, inter-alia, relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Areva T & D India Ltd. (345 ITR 421) besides the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 392) to support the argument that the non-compete fees would constitute intangible asset which would be eligible for depreciation at applicable rate. 7. We find that this claim has been made by the assessee for the first time in AY 2010-11. The return for that y…

HARITA FAHRER LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIR-2(2), CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3481/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…dated 29.07.2021). The Ld. AR, on the other hand, inter-alia, relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Areva T & D India Ltd. (345 ITR 421) besides the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 392) to support the argument that the non-compete fees would constitute intangible asset which would be eligible for depreciation at applicable rate. 7. We find that this claim has been made by the assessee for the first time in AY 2010-11. The return for that y…

HARITA FAHRER LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP CIR-2(2), CHENNAI

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3480/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2254/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3480/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.3481/Chny/2018 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2746/Chny/2019 (िनधाBरण वषB / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Harita Fehrer Limited Dcit-Corporate Circle-2(2) / बनाम/ No.29, Jayalakshmi Estates, Acit, Salary Circle-Ii Vs. Haddows Road, Chennai-600 006. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacch-1037-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : ( !थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (Fca), Shri Ravikumar, (Ca) & Shri Anil Kumar, (Ca) - Ld. Ars !थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan (Add.Cit)-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, (FCA)For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan (Add.CIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…dated 29.07.2021). The Ld. AR, on the other hand, inter-alia, relied on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120) as well as the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Areva T & D India Ltd. (345 ITR 421) besides the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 392) to support the argument that the non-compete fees would constitute intangible asset which would be eligible for depreciation at applicable rate. 7. We find that this claim has been made by the assessee for the first time in AY 2010-11. The return for that y…

Showing 1–20 of 97 · Page 1 of 5