SKS Micro Finance Ltd. v. DCIT

Jm Morgan Stanley Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 4(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…o take into account other known factors such as obsolescence and thus know-how, in whatever form it may be, is also capable of diminishing value by reason of obsolescence. We find that the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in DCIT vs Weizmann Forex Ltd, (2012) 51 SOT 525 (Mumbai) allowed depreciation claimed by the assessee on right over infrastructure and other advantages attached to the marketing network under the category of intangible asset as contemplated under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Insofar as the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd (supra) relied upon by the…

ACIT 5(1), Mumbai vs. Cadbury India Ltd, Mumbai

…marketing and distribution, territorial know-how, including information of the territory and allowed the depreciation on such payment on intangible assets. He has also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT V/s WEIZMANN FOREX LTD. [2012] 51 SOT 525 (ITAT)[Mum]) as well as the series of other decisions of this Tribunal, wherein the Tribunal held that marketing strategies and distribution network, customer lists, marketing strategies, and software as intangible assets eligible for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Sr.Counsel further submitted that the AO has disallowed the depreciatio…

Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 22, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4581/Mum/2012

…e non-compete fees was paid for a period of 3 years and the same was allowed as revenue expenditure. Sr.No. Case law Citation i. India Capital Markets P Ltd. v DCIT 56 SOT 32(Mum) ii. SKS Micro Finance Ltd v DCIT 145 ITD 111(Hyd) iii. DCIT v Weizman Forex Ltd 51 SOT 525 (Mum) iv. Jyoti (India) Metal Industries P Ltd vs Asst. CIT and in the case of India Capital Markets (P) Ltd. (supra), it has been held, ―A perusal of the provision of section 32(1)(ii) suggests that certain intangible assets on which depreciation could be claimed are: know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchise or any other bus…

ACIT CC 22, Mumbai vs. Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4581/Mum/2012

…e non-compete fees was paid for a period of 3 years and the same was allowed as revenue expenditure. Sr.No. Case law Citation i. India Capital Markets P Ltd. v DCIT 56 SOT 32(Mum) ii. SKS Micro Finance Ltd v DCIT 145 ITD 111(Hyd) iii. DCIT v Weizman Forex Ltd 51 SOT 525 (Mum) iv. Jyoti (India) Metal Industries P Ltd vs Asst. CIT and in the case of India Capital Markets (P) Ltd. (supra), it has been held, ―A perusal of the provision of section 32(1)(ii) suggests that certain intangible assets on which depreciation could be claimed are: know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchise or any other bus…

Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. Central Circle 22, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4581/Mum/2012

…e non-compete fees was paid for a period of 3 years and the same was allowed as revenue expenditure. Sr.No. Case law Citation i. India Capital Markets P Ltd. v DCIT 56 SOT 32(Mum) ii. SKS Micro Finance Ltd v DCIT 145 ITD 111(Hyd) iii. DCIT v Weizman Forex Ltd 51 SOT 525 (Mum) iv. Jyoti (India) Metal Industries P Ltd vs Asst. CIT and in the case of India Capital Markets (P) Ltd. (supra), it has been held, ―A perusal of the provision of section 32(1)(ii) suggests that certain intangible assets on which depreciation could be claimed are: know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchise or any other bus…

A.C.I.T. C.C.22, Mumbai vs. Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd., Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4581/Mum/2012

…e non-compete fees was paid for a period of 3 years and the same was allowed as revenue expenditure. Sr.No. Case law Citation i. India Capital Markets P Ltd. v DCIT 56 SOT 32(Mum) ii. SKS Micro Finance Ltd v DCIT 145 ITD 111(Hyd) iii. DCIT v Weizman Forex Ltd 51 SOT 525 (Mum) iv. Jyoti (India) Metal Industries P Ltd vs Asst. CIT and in the case of India Capital Markets (P) Ltd. (supra), it has been held, ―A perusal of the provision of section 32(1)(ii) suggests that certain intangible assets on which depreciation could be claimed are: know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchise or any other bus…

Motilal Oswal Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 22, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.4581/Mum/2012

…e non-compete fees was paid for a period of 3 years and the same was allowed as revenue expenditure. Sr.No. Case law Citation i. India Capital Markets P Ltd. v DCIT 56 SOT 32(Mum) ii. SKS Micro Finance Ltd v DCIT 145 ITD 111(Hyd) iii. DCIT v Weizman Forex Ltd 51 SOT 525 (Mum) iv. Jyoti (India) Metal Industries P Ltd vs Asst. CIT and in the case of India Capital Markets (P) Ltd. (supra), it has been held, ―A perusal of the provision of section 32(1)(ii) suggests that certain intangible assets on which depreciation could be claimed are: know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchise or any other bus…