How many judgments cite CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.?

540 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 302), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 32(1), Section 115JB, Section 32, Section 32(1)(ii), Section 14A.

CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.

348 ITR 302Supreme Court of India2012#119 most cited

What is CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. authority for?

Goodwill, whether arising from an amalgamation or a slump sale, is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. While the assessee must prove the existence and valuation of such goodwill, it is recognized as a depreciable asset.

540

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,837 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Smifs Securities Ltd. · depreciation on goodwill · Section 32(1) · intangible asset · goodwill on amalgamation · slump sale · business acquisition · commercial rights · Section 32(1)(ii) · excess consideration · Section 43(1) · CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.

Also reported as

24 Taxmann.com 222210 Taxmann 42813 SCC 488252 CTR 233

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 115JB Section 32 Section 32(1)(ii)Section 14A Section 143(2)Section 43(1)

Issues it is cited on

goodwill arising on amalgamation depreciation on goodwill business transfer agreement section 43(6)(c)section 32(1)(ii)commercial rights transferor company section 43(6)transferee company slump sale section 32(1)section 170

Judgments citing CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.

M/S United Breweries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…eries Limited. 6.1 The AO in the assessment order has held that the assessee is not eligible to claim depreciation on goodwill. The AO has held that the assessee’s reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v Smifs Securities Ltd reported in 348 ITR 302 (SC) is not correct and relied on the detailed analysis / reasoning provided in the assessment for AY 2007-08 wherein the claim of the assessee was rejected. The AO accordingly disallowed depreciation of Rs.3,73,88,587 claimed by the assessee on ‘goodwill’. 6.2 Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee raised this issue before the first a…

Infiniti Retail Ltd, Mumbai vs. Chief CIT (OSD) (I/C. Pr. CIT - 2 ), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3685/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Infiniti Retail Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Unit No.701 & 702, 7th Floor Income Tax-2(2)(1) Room No.545, 5th Floor Kaledonia, Sahar Road Andheri (E) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai-400 069 M.K.Road, Mumbai -400020 PAN/GIR No.AACCV1726H (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue by Shri K.C.Selvamani Date of Hearing 17/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement 31/10/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.3685/Mum/2019 for A.Y.2013…

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 12(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 126/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri, K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar K. Ganeshan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 43B

…e assessee claimed a sum of Rs.6,57,08,884 as depreciation on goodwill @ 25%. The AO disallowed the claim by stating that there was no value assigned to the goodwill by relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smiffs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC). The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the disallowance by relying on the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2007- 08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 in ITA No.722,801, 1065 & 1066/Bang/2014. ITA Nos.125 & 126/Bang/2020 Page 4 of 26 6. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR conceded that the issue is held against the a…

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range- 12, Bangalore

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

ITA 125/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri, K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar K. Ganeshan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 43B

Gtpl Crazy Network, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 86/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 32(1)

…der the category of intangible assets or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature and therefore eligible for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in case of CIT vs. Smiff Securities Ltd. 348 ITR 302. As regards the issue of valuation, the Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer should have appreciated that as part of market practice, there is no standard rate nor standard method prescribed for acquisition of such businesses. The valuation of assets is altogether different issue and no such standard valuation method is prescribed. The acq…

Franklin Templeton Management (India) P.Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -Range-6(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2046/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Franklin Templeton Dy. Cit–Range 6(3)(1) Management (India) P. Ltd. Room No.506, 5 Th Floor, 12Th& 13Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, India Bulls Finance Center, Vs. Tower–2, Senapati Bapat M.K. Road, Marg, Elphinstone (W), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400013 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaact1609B Assessee By : Shri Farooq Irani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vrinda U Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri Farooq Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vrinda U Matkari, DR

Section 250Section 253Section 32(1)

…whereas the Appellant has been claiming depreciation on goodwill since AY 2003-04 through rectification letters, revised return and original returns as applicable, after the Supreme court's decision in the case of C.I.T. Kolkata v Smits Securities Ltd [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC). 2.9 The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the learned AO has incorrectly stated that, the Appellant (in the year of amalgamation i.e., 2002 and subsequent years) held the shares of PAMC as investment and was claiming expenditure on account of diminution in value of investment to reduce the tax liability. In fact, such…

Aculife Healthcare Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 305/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R

Section 263

…hereby being condoned. 6. On merits, before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is correct since the ld. Assessing Officer has relied upon the Supreme Court case in the case of Smifs Securities Pvt. Ltd. 348 ITR 302 (SC) and also for the reason that the Assessing Officer had made detailed inquiries on this aspect before passing the assessment order. The counsel for the assessee drew our attention to page 18 of the paper book- “ fixed assets schedule” of the assessee company for the impugned assessment year, in which goodwill on demerger has been duly reflect…

Aculife Healthcare Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 304/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Hemanshu C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R

Section 263

Merck Specialities Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2056/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 4Section 5Section 92CSection 92C(1)

…nting the excess consideration discharged by the assessee company over the net worth of the amalgamating company and thus the same is eligible for depreciation. Reliance has been placed on the addition of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC). During the course of hearing, assessee placed on record audited accounts of assessee as well as order of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court approving the scheme of amalgamation. Further, reference was also made to balance sheet of amalgamating subsidiary company as well as other documents forming part of the paper book in support of its clai…

Trivitron Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1340/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1340/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. M/S.Trivitron Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner- “Sapthagiri Bhavan”, Of Income Tax, New No.15, Old No.25, Corporate Circle-3(1), Trivitron Sapthagiri Bhawan, Chennai. 4Th Street, Abhiramapuram, Chennai. [Pan: Aaact 9378 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.M.Rajan, CIT

Section 119Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

…sets acquired in the scheme of amalgamation more than the depreciation is allowable to the amalgamating company. As regards the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smiff Securities Ltd. (2012) M/s.Trivitron Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. :: 10 :: 348 ITR 302, the said ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is only on the point whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature as per the provisions of section 32(1) of the Act. Therefore, there is no quarrel on the issue that goodwill is eligible for depreciation. However, the said…

M/S. India Medtronics Pvt.Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, similarly the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 480/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Rajan R. Vora with Sh. Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamath/ Akhtar Hussain Ansari

Section 234BSection 271Section 274Section 92C

…ed material on record. The issue relating to depreciation on goodwill by treating it as an intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act is no more res integra in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Smifs Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC). In this decision the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that goodwill is in the nature of any other business or commercial right or similar in nature, hence, is to be treated as intangible asset. Following the aforesaid decision, the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment years 2002– 03, 2003–04, 2007-08 and 2008–09, as referred to…

M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2593/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 2593/Bang/2019 M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Acit, 2015-16 Te Park, 22B, Doddenakundi Corporation, Circle – 2, 2Nd Phase, Industrial Area, Large Taxpayer Unit, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan: Aabct 7374 C 372/Bang/2021 -Do- -Do- 2016-17 200/Bang/2022 -Do- Dcit, Ltu, 2017-18 Circle – 2, Bengaluru. 716/Bang/2022 -Do- Acit, 2018-19 Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92Section 92ASection 92F

…eciation claimed on goodwill in computation of income should not be disallowed as per the Act. The Assessee provided the required information and submitted that as per the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court's in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC) and other judicial precedents, the difference paid between the fair value of assets less liabilities i.e., networth and the consideration paid for transfer was to be regarded as goodwill on which Assessee can claim depreciation. The AO rejected the contention of the assessee and disallowed the claim of depreciation by invoking explanation 3…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle -5, Pune vs. Serum Institute of India Pvt Ltd., Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 323/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 10ASection 14ASection 35Section 35(1)

…he expenditure under the provisions of the Act as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of (i) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 82 ITR 363 (SC) and (ii) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 116 ITR 1 (SC) and (iii) CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC). The Tribunal had rendered the decision following ratio rendered in those judgment and, therefore, we do not see any reason to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A), inasmuch as, he only followed the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2008-09 (supra). Therefore, we do not find any merits in the gr…

Metallurgical Services P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-6, Mumbai

In the result, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 835/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 835/मुं/2021 (िन.व. 2015-16) Metallurgical Services Private Limited, Mehta House, Ashok Silk Mills Lane, Opp. Damodar Park, Off Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai 400 086 Pan: Aafcm-5665-D ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumba-6, Room No.501, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Siddesh Chougule & Ajit Jain "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Amol Kirtane & Mehul Jain सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/09/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: S/Shri Siddesh Chougule & Ajit JainFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Kirtane & Mehul Jain

Section 263Section 92BSection 92B(1)

…include existing contracts of purchases, maintenance, vendor contract, etc., transfer of technical expertise employees as well. The assessee in order to substantiate his contentions placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC); (ii) DCIT vs Toyo Engineering India Ltd. vs. DCIT, 18 ITR(T) 159 (Mumbai); & (iii) Triune Energy Services Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT, 237 Taxman 230 (Delhi) The PCIT after considering the submissions of the assessee concluded that depreciation on goodwill as claimed cannot be allowed to the assessee and restored the issue to Assessing Officer to ex…

Carolina Food and Industries Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2625/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 32

…and accordingly the assessee claimed depreciation amounting to Rs.6,22,022,993/- on Goodwill under section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Smifs Securities Limited (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC). The ld. Assessing Officer on examination of this note issued a questionnaire to the assessee calling upon to clarify and offer explanation in respect of three issues, namely details of goodwill shown as an intangible assets and depreciation claimed from its inception post 2 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Carolina Food And Industries Pvt. Li…

Atos It Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 226/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Bijoy Kumar Panda, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92B(2)Section 92C

…on and net assets taken over. The ld AR submitted that the assessee has claimed depreciation on the goodwill so acquired and in this regard placed reliance in this regard on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiff Securities Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC). 30. The ld. AR further submitted that the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of I & B SEEDS Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT in ITA No.3415/Bang/2018 dated 15.6.2022 and in the case of Altimetrik India Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.2511/Bang/2019 dated 3.2.2022 has dealt with the issue of depreciation on goodwill and held it to be as an allow…

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, all the three additional grounds mentioned above are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2701/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Section 43(6)(c)

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri ABY T. Varkey (JM) I.T.A. No. 2701/Mum/2014 (A.Y. 2009-10) Vs. DCIT-10(3) Thermo Fisher Scientific India Private Limited Mumbai. 403-404, B-Wing, Delphi Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai-400 076. PAN : AABCT3207A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Niraj Sheth Department by Ms. Vatsalaa Jha Date of Hearing 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 24.08.2022 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- This appeal of the assessee relating to AY 2009-10 was earlier disposed of by the Tribunal on 28-06-2019. Subsequently, the assessee mov…

The DCIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. M/S. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 432/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…urt. The treatment of cancellation of shares held by amalgamated company in the assessee was approved by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court. The assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC), wherein it was held that pursuant to an amalgamation of another company with the assessee, the difference between the consideration paid 9 ITA No.431-432/SRT/2018 & CO 12/SRT/2021 (A.Ys 07-08 & 12-13) M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. and the net value of assets of the amalgamating company was treated as “goodwill” a…

The DCIT, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. M/S. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., Bharuch

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 431/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

M/S. V.V.V. & Sons Edible Oils Ltd., Virudhunagar vs. DCIT, Central-1, Madurai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2281/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri P. G. Sekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar,CIT

Section 143(3)

…ssets transferred and hence, the AO estimated the goodwill of the assessee company as on 01.04.2009 at Rs.14,56,16,817/- and allowed depreciation at the rate of 25% relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302(SC)and also Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of DCIT vs. Toyo Engineering India Ltd., ITA No.3279/Mum/2008. 4.6 The AO by applying the above ratio, recomputed the depreciation being difference between the book value of the asset and the liabilities transferred to goodwill account of the assessee company which worked out to Rs.14,56,16,817/-…