Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DCIT

41 Taxmann.com 120High Court2014#1991 most cited

What is Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

A non-compete fee paid as part of a business acquisition or transaction constitutes an intangible asset, eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 32(1)(ii) · Section 32(1) · non-compete fee · depreciation on non-compete fee · intangible asset · business transfer agreement · commercial rights · slump sale · transferee company

Also reported as

264 CTR 187222 Taxmann 209

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 32(1)Section 35(2AB)

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on non-compete feenon-compete feesection 36(i)(iii)section 36(i)business transfer agreementdepreciation on softwaresection 32(1)(ii)commercial rightsdepreciation on goodwilltransferee companyslump salesection 32(1)

Judgments citing Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. v. DCIT

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)

…for 2 years. This right would possibly enable the assessee to run its business more profitably and would enable it to ward-off at least one of the competitors in the market. The decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120), rendered on similar facts, supports our view. In that case, the assessee made payment towards acquisition of intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and non-compete fees and claimed depreciation. The Tribunal allowed depreciation on IPR but denied depreciation on non-compete fees on the ground that it was not an asset. Further, there was no b…

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)

…for 2 years. This right would possibly enable the assessee to run its business more profitably and would enable it to ward-off at least one of the competitors in the market. The decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120), rendered on similar facts, supports our view. In that case, the assessee made payment towards acquisition of intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and non-compete fees and claimed depreciation. The Tribunal allowed depreciation on IPR but denied depreciation on non-compete fees on the ground that it was not an asset. Further, there was no b…

Harita Fehrer Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Salary Circle II, Chennai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2254/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

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)

…for 2 years. This right would possibly enable the assessee to run its business more profitably and would enable it to ward-off at least one of the competitors in the market. The decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (41 Taxmann.com 120), rendered on similar facts, supports our view. In that case, the assessee made payment towards acquisition of intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and non-compete fees and claimed depreciation. The Tribunal allowed depreciation on IPR but denied depreciation on non-compete fees on the ground that it was not an asset. Further, there was no b…

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 449/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., V. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (Osd), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaacp 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs.Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/s.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., v. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (OSD), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [PAN: AAACP 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.449/Chny/2011…

Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO (OSD), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 121/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Nov 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/S.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., V. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (Osd), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [Pan: Aaacp 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs.Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT
Section 10ASection 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.121/Chny/2011 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2004-05 M/s.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., v. The Income Tax – No.1, First Main Road, Officer (OSD), United India Colony, Company Circle-V(2), Kodambakkam, Chennai. Chennai – 600 024. [PAN: AAACP 1895 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.449/Chny/2011…

Abbott Healthcare P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 570/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.570/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Abbott Healthcare Private Limited., 4, Corporate Park, Sion -Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai 400 071. Pan: Aaack-3935-D ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Raghavendra Singh/ Lokesh Shah/Kiran Belkar ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Smt. Monica Khare सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 04/05/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

For Appellant: S/Shri Raghavendra Singh/For Respondent: Smt. Monica Khare
Section 254(2)Section 32Section 32(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ के ” "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अमरजीत "संह, लेखा सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “ K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.570/मुं/2018 ("न.व. 2011-12) Abbott Healthcare Private Limited., 4, Corporate Park, Sion -Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai 400 071. PAN: AAACK-3935-D ..... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Room No.561, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : S/Shri Ragha…

ACIT, Chennai vs. C.H.Robinson Worldwide Freight India P. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3444/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘डी "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" मोहन गग", "या"यक सद!य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद!य के सम( BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.3444/Chny/2016 & C.O. No.28/Chny/2017 [in ITA No.3444/Chny/2016] ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Vs M/s. CH Robinson Worldwide The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Freight India Pvt.Ltd. 54/28, SBL House, 1st floor, Corporate Circle-1(2) Chennai-600 034. Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. PAN: AACCC 9617L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant…

DCIT, 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Imcd Group B.V. - India Branch (Currently Knon As Imdc India Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3322/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Mallikarjain UttureFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Bagmar
Section 271(1)(c)

…n the backdrop of the settled position of law, and being of the view that as the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Pentasoft Technologies Ltd. vs. DCIT (2014) 264 CTR 187 )(Mad) and that of the High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Ingersoll Rand International Ind Ltd. (2014) (48 taxman.com 349), therefore, respectfully follow the same. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations uphold the order passed by the A.O. under Sec. 14(3) r.w.s. 144C(13) in compliance to the directions of the DRP under Sec.…

ACIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S Havells India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 466/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―C‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi CR Building IP Estate, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, LTU, NBCC Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT (LTU), Vs. Havells India Ltd, NBCC Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi PAN: AAACH…

M/S Havells India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6073/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―C‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi CR Building IP Estate, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, LTU, NBCC Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT (LTU), Vs. Havells India Ltd, NBCC Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi PAN: AAACH…

M/S Havells India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6072/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Aug 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 80H

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―C‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi CR Building IP Estate, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. DCIT, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, LTU, NBCC Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, PAN: AAACH0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ACIT (LTU), Vs. Havells India Ltd, NBCC Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi PAN: AAACH…

Rentokil India Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 79/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S.Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.S.P.Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. R.Anita, JCIT

…Transfer Agreement, no amount was quantified for the same. It was a further submission that even assuming the amount was non-compete fee still in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., reported in 264 CTR 187, non- compete fee has been held to be a right as an intangible asset entitled to depreciation u/s.32. It was a further submission that neither the term customer list nor non-compete fee was defined in Sec.32. It was a submission that Sec.92B(2)(ii)(f) however defined intangible asset to include the customer list and sub- clause (g) to include non…

Imcd Group B.V. - India Branch (Currently Knon As Imdc India Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT (It), Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are rejected

ITA 2735/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri R. Sandeep BagmarFor Respondent: Kumari Padmapani Bora
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 37

…sidered the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of the Sharp Business System v. CIT (supra) which the Ld.DR relied on. The Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of the Pentasoft technologies Ltd. v. DCIT [264 CTR 187] and the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Ingersoll Rand International Ind Ltd. [48 taxman.com 349] while coming to the conclusion that the assessee is entitled for depreciation on non-compete fee observing as under: - “9. We have heard the authorized representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of th…

DCIT -14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Imcd Group B.V. India Branch (Now Imcd India Private Limited), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are rejected

ITA 2433/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri R. Sandeep BagmarFor Respondent: Kumari Padmapani Bora
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 37

…sidered the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of the Sharp Business System v. CIT (supra) which the Ld.DR relied on. The Tribunal followed the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of the Pentasoft technologies Ltd. v. DCIT [264 CTR 187] and the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Ingersoll Rand International Ind Ltd. [48 taxman.com 349] while coming to the conclusion that the assessee is entitled for depreciation on non-compete fee observing as under: - “9. We have heard the authorized representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of th…

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

In the result appeal filed by

ITA 1666/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य के सम' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1664 to 1666/Chny/2019 "नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner of Income- v. M/s.Dorma India Pvt. Ltd., tax (OSD), No.14, Pattullous Road, Corporate Range-1, Royapettah, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [PAN: AAACD3980D] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent) Department by : Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT Assessee by : Mr. N.V.Balaji, Adv. : 19.0…

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य के सम' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1664 to 1666/Chny/2019 "नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner of Income- v. M/s.Dorma India Pvt. Ltd., tax (OSD), No.14, Pattullous Road, Corporate Range-1, Royapettah, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [PAN: AAACD3980D] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent) Department by : Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT Assessee by : Mr. N.V.Balaji, Adv. : 19.0…

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी र"मत कोचर, लेखा सद"य के सम' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1664 to 1666/Chny/2019 "नधा(रण वष( /Assessment Years: 2010-11 to 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner of Income- v. M/s.Dorma India Pvt. Ltd., tax (OSD), No.14, Pattullous Road, Corporate Range-1, Royapettah, Chennai. Chennai-600 002. [PAN: AAACD3980D] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-यथ+/Respondent) Department by : Ms.R.Anitha, JCIT Assessee by : Mr. N.V.Balaji, Adv. : 19.0…

DCIT Cir. 7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Gujarat Glass Ltd. (Now Known As M/S. Piramal Glass Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4777/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no. 4777/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2005–06) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–7(3)(2), Mumbai v/s Gujarat Glass Ltd. (Now known as Piramal Glass Ltd.) Peninsula Corporate Park ……………. Respondent Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013 PAN – AABCG0093R ITA no. 4778/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2007–08) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–7(3)(2), Mumbai v/s Gujarat Glass Ltd. (Now known as Piramal Glass…

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4581/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acc Ltd. (Formerly Known Commissioner Of As The Associated Cement Income Tax-Ltu Vs. Companies Ltd.) Cement Mumbai. House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai. Pan No. Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh Thar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. R.P. Meena, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/10/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. R.P. Meena, CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 ACC Ltd. (Formerly known Commissioner of as The Associated Cement Income Tax-LTU Vs. Companies Ltd.) Cement Mumbai. House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai. PAN No. AAACT1507C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Yogesh Thar, AR Revenue by : Mr. R.P. Meena, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 24/07/2018 Date of pronouncement : 15/10/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2010-11. The appeal is d…

M/S Rentokil India Private Limited, Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 5 (1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 is

ITA 445/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. Nos. 444 & 445/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2014-15 M/S. Rentokil India Private Liited. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 105, 4Th Floor, Sreela Terrace, Vs. Corporate Circle – 5(1), 1St Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, 4Th Floor, Aayakarbhavan, Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, [Pan: Aadcr 7629E] Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.P Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, JCIT
Section 32(1)

…Transfer Agreement, no amount was quantified for the same. It was a further submission that even assuming the amount was non-compete fee still in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s.Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., reported in 264 CTR 187, non-compete fee has been held to be a right as an intangible asset entitled to depreciation u/s.32. It was a further submission that neither the term customer list nor non- compete fee was defined in Sec.32. It was a submission that Sec.92B(2)(ii)(f) however defined intangible asset to include the customer list and sub-clause (g) to include non-…