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 367,735 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 115JBSection 32Section 32(1)(ii)Section 14ASection 143(2)Section 43(1)

Issues it is cited on

goodwill arising on amalgamationdepreciation on goodwillbusiness transfer agreementsection 43(6)(c)section 32(1)(ii)commercial rightstransferor companysection 43(6)transferee companyslump salesection 32(1)section 170

Judgments citing CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.

ACIT (OSD) Corporate Range 1, Chennai vs. Dorma India P. Ltd., Chennai

In the result appeal filed by

ITA 1665/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. N.V.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 32

…on goodwill as per the Companies Act, 1956 (refer Attachment 1). However, the same was inadvertently not claimed by the Company in the computation of taxable income." The assessee company relied on the following case laws:- (i) CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd., (348 ITR 302)(SC) (ii) Areva T & D India Ltd., v. DCIT (345 ITR 421) (Delhi) (iii) CIT-IV vs. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd., (331 ITR 192) (Delhi) The AO asked assessee to submit complete details of depreciation on goodwill claimed by assessee, financial statements of Arc Trends Systems India Private Ltd., and Global Trends System Private Ltd., as…

ACIT (OSD) Corporate Range 1, Chennai vs. Dorma India P. Ltd., Chennai

In the result appeal filed by

ITA 1664/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Mr. N.V.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 32

…on goodwill as per the Companies Act, 1956 (refer Attachment 1). However, the same was inadvertently not claimed by the Company in the computation of taxable income." The assessee company relied on the following case laws:- (i) CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd., (348 ITR 302)(SC) (ii) Areva T & D India Ltd., v. DCIT (345 ITR 421) (Delhi) (iii) CIT-IV vs. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd., (331 ITR 192) (Delhi) The AO asked assessee to submit complete details of depreciation on goodwill claimed by assessee, financial statements of Arc Trends Systems India Private Ltd., and Global Trends System Private Ltd., as…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 12/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…show cause notice dated 15/12/2017 to the assessee calling for its reply by 22/12/2017. Assessee vide its letter dated 22/12/2017 explained the transaction and also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiff Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302, to argue that depreciation on goodwill is allowable. However, AO was of the opinion that since the goodwill was not existent in the books of ASPL and was introduced only under the scheme of amalgamation, the proviso to section 32(1) of the Act is applicable and, therefore, the depreciation, allowable in the case of succession, amalgamation or me…

Mylan Laboratories Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2335/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Sh. YVST Sai, D.R
Section 251Section 28Section 32Section 32(1)Section 37(1)Section 43(1)Section 68

…show cause notice dated 15/12/2017 to the assessee calling for its reply by 22/12/2017. Assessee vide its letter dated 22/12/2017 explained the transaction and also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiff Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302, to argue that depreciation on goodwill is allowable. However, AO was of the opinion that since the goodwill was not existent in the books of ASPL and was introduced only under the scheme of amalgamation, the proviso to section 32(1) of the Act is applicable and, therefore, the depreciation, allowable in the case of succession, amalgamation or me…

M/S. Bayer Vapi Private Ltd. (Formerly Known As Bilag Industries P. Ltd.), Vapi vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for A

ITA 1769/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri O.P. Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No’S.2886/Ahd/2010, 794/Ahd/2014 & 1769/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2006-07, 2009-10 & 2011-12 बनाम M/S. Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd. , Addl. Cit Range- ( Now Known As M/S. Bayer Vapi Vs. Vapi, Range Vapi Private Limited) 306/3,Phase-Ii Shivam Commercial Complex Gidc-1, Vapi Gujarat National Highway No 8 Vapi Pan: Aabcb 2100 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri A. Gopalakrishnan Aiyer - Ca िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri O. P. Singh Cit (D.R.) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By 26.09.2019 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 24.10.2019 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Am: 1. The Above Captioned Three Appeals For The Assessment Year 2006-07, 2009-10 & 2011-12 By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Dated 28.07.2010 & Dated 15.01.2014 Respectively Under The Income-Tax Act,1961 ['The Act' For Short] On The Direction Of Drp By The Addl. Cit Range-Vapi Range Vapi (Herein After Referred As The Ao) & The Appeal For The Assessment Year 2011-12 By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) Dated 29.04.2016. Since The Common Issues Are Involved In These Appeals Therefore, These Were Heard Together & Consolidated Order Is Being Passed As Under: It(Tp)A No.2886/Ahd/2010/A.Y. 2006-07/ By The Assessee: 2. Ground Nos.1 Is General In Nature & Do Not Require Adjudication.

For Appellant: 2. Ground Nos.1 is general in nature and do not require adjudication
Section 143(3)

…1 Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd. Now Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd. v. Addl. CIT – R- Vapi I.T.A.No.2886/AHD/2010 & 794/AHD/2014 & 1769/AHD/2016/A.Y. 2006-07 , 2009-10 & 2011-2 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL-SURAT-BENCH-SURAT BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No’s.2886/AHD/2010, 794/AHD/2014 and 1769/AHD/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2006-07, 2009-10 and 2011-12 बनाम M/s. Bilag Industries Pvt. Ltd. , Addl. CIT Range- ( Now known as M/s. Bayer Vapi Vs. Vapi, Range Vapi Private Limited) 306/3,Phase-II Shivam Commercial Com…

M/S. Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd., (Formerly Known As Bilag Industries Pvt.Ltd., Vapi vs. The Addl.CIT., Vapi Range, Vapi

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

ITA 2912/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri O.P. Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2912/Ahd/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम M/S. Bayer Vapi Private Limited) Addl. Cit Range- (Formerly M/S. Bilag Industries Vs. Vapi, Range Vapi Pvt. Ltd.), 306/3,Phase-Ii, Shivam Commercial Complex Gidc-1, Vapi Gujarat. National Highway No 8 Vapi Pan: Aabcb 2100 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 40ASection 40A(2)(b)

…Bayer Vapi Pvt. Ltd. Formerly Bilag Industries v. Addl. CIT – R- Vapi/I.T.A.No.2912/AHD/2015/A.Y. 10-11 1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत "यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL-SURAT-BENCH-SURAT BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2912/AHD/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 बनाम M/s. Bayer Vapi Private Limited) Addl. CIT Range- (formerly M/s. Bilag Industries Vs. Vapi, Range Vapi Pvt. Ltd.), 306/3,Phase-II, Shivam Commercial Complex GIDC-1, Vapi Gujarat. National Highway No 8 Vapi PAN: AABCB 2100 L अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri A.…

Si Group India Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3431/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Si Group India Limited Large Taxpayer Unit – 2 Plot No: D-2/I, Ttc Industrial Area World Trade Centre Thane – Belapur Road Centre 1, 29Th Floor, Cuffe Parade Opp. Juinagar Railway Station Mumbai – 400 005 Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Pan: Aaach7323L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Si Group India Limited V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Large Taxpayer Unit Plot No: D-2/I, Ttc Industrial Area Mumbai Thane – Belapur Road Opp. Juinagar Railway Station Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Pan: Aaach7323L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain & Shri Siddhesh Chaugule Department By : Shri Vivek A. Perampura

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain &For Respondent: Shri Vivek A. Perampura
Section 92C

…above the value of the Undertaking. 6.2. The assessee had not claimed depreciation on such Goodwill in its Return of Income. Based on subsequent development in terms of the law / principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. 348 ITR 302 (SC), the assessee for the first time made its claim before this Tribunal for Asst Year 2003-04 and subsequently, for Asst Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. This Tribunal in assessee’s own case for Asst Year 2003-04 in ITA No. 4384/Mum/2010 dated 16.1.2015 had remanded the matter back to the file of the ld AO for fresh adjudication. This Tribunal passed…

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. S I Group India Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3306/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Si Group India Limited Large Taxpayer Unit – 2 Plot No: D-2/I, Ttc Industrial Area World Trade Centre Thane – Belapur Road Centre 1, 29Th Floor, Cuffe Parade Opp. Juinagar Railway Station Mumbai – 400 005 Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Pan: Aaach7323L (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Si Group India Limited V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax Large Taxpayer Unit Plot No: D-2/I, Ttc Industrial Area Mumbai Thane – Belapur Road Opp. Juinagar Railway Station Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Pan: Aaach7323L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ajit Kumar Jain & Shri Siddhesh Chaugule Department By : Shri Vivek A. Perampura

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain &For Respondent: Shri Vivek A. Perampura
Section 92C

…above the value of the Undertaking. 6.2. The assessee had not claimed depreciation on such Goodwill in its Return of Income. Based on subsequent development in terms of the law / principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. 348 ITR 302 (SC), the assessee for the first time made its claim before this Tribunal for Asst Year 2003-04 and subsequently, for Asst Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. This Tribunal in assessee’s own case for Asst Year 2003-04 in ITA No. 4384/Mum/2010 dated 16.1.2015 had remanded the matter back to the file of the ld AO for fresh adjudication. This Tribunal passed…

DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai vs. India Medtronic P. Ltd, Baroda

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4074/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. Vora a/wFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar

…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 and 2008–09, as referred to above, dec…

Cadbury India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 5(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 7539/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7539/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Mondelez India Foods Private Limited Addl. Cit–Range-5(1) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mondelez House बनाम/ Unit Number-2001, 20Th Floor Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Tower-3(Wing-C), India Bulls Finance Centre Parel, Mumbai-400 013. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-0460-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Hiten Chande-Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri V. Janardhan-Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 24/07/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 14/10/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1.1 Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year [In Short ‘Ay’] 2008-09 Contest Certain Additions / Disallowances / Adjustments Made In Final Assessment Order Dated 18/10/2012 Passed By Ld. Addl. Cit, Range-

For Appellant: S/Shri J.D. Mistry & Hiten Chande-Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri V. Janardhan-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92C

…al, in AY 2003-04, at para-17 allowed depreciation claim applying the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in 18 Mondelez India Foods Private Limited [Formerly known as Cadbury India Ltd.] Assessment Year-2008-09 M/s Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012 348 ITR 302]. Similar view has been taken in subsequent years. Therefore, respectfully following the consistent view of the Tribunal on this issue in assessee’s own case, we allow assessee’s claim of depreciation. Ground No. 13 stands allowed. Disallowance u/s 14A 5.1 During assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee earned exempt income of Rs.…

DCIT - 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Lafarge Aggregates & Concrete India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4477/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…d that the very same issue was before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier years, i.e. assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. It was stated that the Tribunal following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC) and the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) allowed the claim of assessee vide para 4 and 5 of its order as under :- “4. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, the learned Counsel for the ass…

DCIT - 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Lafarge Aggregates & Concrete India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4476/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…d that the very same issue was before the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier years, i.e. assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. It was stated that the Tribunal following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Smifs Securities Ltd., 348 ITR 302 (SC) and the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., 349 ITR 336 (Bom.) allowed the claim of assessee vide para 4 and 5 of its order as under :- “4. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, the learned Counsel for the ass…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Spectris Technologies (P) Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1892/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2019AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Sh. Tarandip Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 32

…s not result in the acquisition of any patents, copyrights, trade mark are know-how and hence, made addition of Rs.2.19 crores. 4. The ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition based on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Smifs Securities Ltd. 348 ITR 302. Since, the order of the ld. CIT (A) is based on the judgment of the Apex Court, we hereby decline to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT (A). 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18/09/2019). (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) (Amit Shukla) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 18/09/2019 *S…

Aramark India P.Ltd(Now Known As Aravon Services Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT-9(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assesee is dismissed

ITA 2546/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathaaramark India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dcit-9(1)(2) (Now Known As Aravon Services Mumbai Pvt.Ltd.) Steel House Building, Plot No.27 ‘B’ Wing, Ground Floor Near Paper Box, Mahakali Caves Road, Andher(East) Mumbai-400 093 Pan/Gir No.Aagca4383F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 32(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 41(1)

…There is no doubt with regard to the allowability of depreciation on goodwill being, any other business or commercial rights of similar nature u/s. 32(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Smifs Securities Limited (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC) held that goodwill is an asset under the expression used in Explanation 3(b)(ii) to section 32(1) and therefore, deprecation is allowable on such an asset as any other business or commercial rights of similar nature. The question before the AO was whether, deprecation on goodwill claimed by the assessee is allowable or not, when such good…

M/S. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2671/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143Section 92C

…ghtful consideration to the rival submissions. Depreciation on goodwill is no more res-integra as this issue has been settled down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in the case of CIT Vs. Smifs Securities Limited 348 ITR 302 where in the Hon’ble Supreme Court was concerned with claim of depreciation on goodwill made by the amalgamated company. 38. However, the issue which has to be decided first is whether such claim of depreciation can be made for the first time at this stage in the light of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Li…

M/S. Aricent Technologies (Holdings) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 90/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143Section 92C

…ghtful consideration to the rival submissions. Depreciation on goodwill is no more res-integra as this issue has been settled down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in the case of CIT Vs. Smifs Securities Limited 348 ITR 302 where in the Hon’ble Supreme Court was concerned with claim of depreciation on goodwill made by the amalgamated company. 38. However, the issue which has to be decided first is whether such claim of depreciation can be made for the first time at this stage in the light of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Li…

Banc Tec India Private Limited, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2692/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyand Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…point of time legal position relating to allowability of depreciation on goodwill was still doubtful and controversial. Therefore, once there was clarity on the issue by virtue of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Smifs Securities Ltd., [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC), the assessee claimed depreciation in the impugned assessment year. He further submitted, the observation of the DRP that the assessee cannot claim depreciation on the entire amount of goodwill is also irrelevant considering the fact that the assessee has actually claimed depreciation on the opening WDV. Thus, he submitted, assessee’s claim…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Airplaza Retail Holdings Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1269/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.Sarat Chnadran,AdvocateFor Respondent: 09.07.2019
Section 260ASection 32(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद य के सम( BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1268 & 1269/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s. Airplaza Retail Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle – 1(1), Chennai – 600 034 4, Mookambika Complex 5th Floor, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AAICA7614B (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,यथ*/Respondent) : Mrs.M.Sub…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Airplaza Retail Holdings Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue for the assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 1268/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Mr.Sarat Chnadran,AdvocateFor Respondent: 09.07.2019
Section 260ASection 32(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद य के सम( BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1268 & 1269/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, M/s. Airplaza Retail Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle – 1(1), Chennai – 600 034 4, Mookambika Complex 5th Floor, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AAICA7614B (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,यथ*/Respondent) : Mrs.M.Sub…

Bright Autoplast Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Asstt. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1990/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedsl.

For Appellant: Ms. Sonia Kumar Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Milin Mehta, AR
Section 234BSection 234CSection 234DSection 271(1)(c)Section 35D

…Shri Paresh S.Shah which was not controverted by the AO. It is submitted that since it has already been held that the differential sum represents goodwill, depreciation is allowable on the same u/s.32 of the Act. We rely on CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 302 (SC). Even if it is held that depreciation on the goodwill has not been claimed by the Assessee, the same shall be available as deduction u/s.32 in accordance with Explanation 5 to section 32 of the Act which states that depreciation is to be allowed to the Assessee whether or not it has been claimed while computing total income. Refer decision…