Mercedes - Benz India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 1865/PUN/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 1999-2000
Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ Ita No. 1865/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 Mercedes Benz India Private Limited. ( Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Private Limited) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase-Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal : Khed, Pune-410 501. Pan : Aabcm 1789L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent
For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 35A
…ent of interpreting the provisions in favour of the assessee. For this proposition, he relied on the following judgmental laws : 1. Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. CIT 196 ITR 188 2. CIT Vs. M/s.Vegetables Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192 3. Gannon Dunkerly & Co. Ltd. Vs. CBDT 159 ITR 162 (Bom.) Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that once the assessee incurs any cost towards acquisition of know-how, the deduction for the same was always intended to be allowed to the assessee. In this regard, he referred to amendment of section 32 by the Finance Act, 1998 which allows the depreciation on the intangible assets, such as know-ho…
