CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax 1(3)1, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Grindwell Norton Limited, Leela Business Park Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed, in aforesaid terms

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

…on on intangible assets was rejected by the Assessing Officer. The issue travelled to the Tribunal. The Tribunal in ITA No. 528/mum/2012 for assessment year 2007-08, following the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smifs Securities Ltd. reported as 348 ITR 302 allowed assessee’s claim of depreciation on intangible assets. The said decision of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 181 of 2018 (supra). Thereafter, in all subsequent assessment years the Tribunal following its C.O. 54/Mum/2024 Grindwell Norton Limited decision in assessment year 2007-08 has consi…

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...

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

…the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiffs Securities Ltd. (202 Smiffs Securities Ltd. (2022) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in 2) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in the said ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue decided is the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or in whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or i…

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...

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

…the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiffs Securities Ltd. (202 Smiffs Securities Ltd. (2022) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in 2) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in the said ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue decided is the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or in whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or i…

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...

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

…the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiffs Securities Ltd. (202 Smiffs Securities Ltd. (2022) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in 2) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in the said ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue decided is the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or in whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or i…

Gati Kintetsu Express Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), 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...

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

…the assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Smiffs Securities Ltd. (202 Smiffs Securities Ltd. (2022) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in 2) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in the said ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue decided is the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or in whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or i…

Gati Kintetsu Express Pvt. Ltd, Maharashtra and Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai, Maharashtra and Mumbai

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

…he BTA. Therefore, there is no question of any intangible asset in the nature of goodwill. (iii) The Ld. CIT(A) distinguished the reliance placed by the assessee on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smiffs Securities Ltd. (2022) (348 ITR 302) (SC) on the ground that in the said ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the issue decided is whether the goodwill falls in the category of intangible assets or in other business or commercial rights of similar in nature and hence eligible for depreciation as per provision of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. But in the instant case issue is that no…

Sony Pictues Netorks India P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO, National E-Assessment Centre Delhi (Now Known As National Faceless Assessment Centre), Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble& Shri B.R. Baskaran: A.Y : 2015-16 : A.Y : 2016-17

…cord. Accordingly, we are of the view that none of the reasons cited by the AO and ld DRP would justify the reduction of depreciation claimed on the amount of goodwill. 12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in the case of CIT vs. Smiff Securities Ltd (2012)(348 ITR 302)(SC) that good will is eligible for depreciation, since it is in the nature of ‘intangible assets”. Hence the claim of the assessee is supported by the above said decision rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court. Since, it was submitted that MSM Singapore did not claim depreciation/was not eligible to claim depreciation on goodwill, the Explanation 5 to s…

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Ricoh India Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (Jm)

…. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) noticed that the depreciation claimed by the assessee was allowed in A.Y. 2008-09 by his predecessor by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smifs Securities Ltd. (2012) 348 ITR 302. Accordingly he directed the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on goodwill. Aggrieved, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 5. We noticed from the paper book filed by the assessee that it is a recurring issue before the Tribunal. We noticed that in A.Y. 2005-06 (ITA No. 4150/Mum/2016), A.Y. 2006-07 (ITA No. 4474/Mum/2016) and in A.Y. 2009-10…