What is Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Membership rights and business contracts, as 'business or commercial rights of similar nature' to a license or franchise, qualify as intangible assets eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

How many judgments cite Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT?

130 judgments on BharatTax cite Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 323), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 32(1)(ii), Section 35(1)(i), Section 35(2AB), Section 90, Section 234D.

Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT (327 ITR 323)

;Marie Gold Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 825/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth KotariFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…icer rejected the submissions made by the assessee and by relying in the case of Dabur India Ltd., in ITA.No. 4679/MUM/2012, rejected the submissions made by the assessee by relying on Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd., [327 ITR 323 (SC)]. Further, he explained the reasons why the case of the assessee is not falling u/s.32(1)(ii) of the Act which does not include the term licence, with the above observation he disallowed the deduction claim made by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions before him. Ld.CIT…

Marie Gold Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 824/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth KotariFor Respondent: Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…icer rejected the submissions made by the assessee and by relying in the case of Dabur India Ltd., in ITA.No. 4679/MUM/2012, rejected the submissions made by the assessee by relying on Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd., [327 ITR 323 (SC)]. Further, he explained the reasons why the case of the assessee is not falling u/s.32(1)(ii) of the Act which does not include the term licence, with the above observation he disallowed the deduction claim made by the assessee. 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and filed detailed submissions before him. Ld.CIT…

Gwalior Bypass Project Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1297/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year : 2015-16] Gwalior Bypass Project Ltd., Vs Acit, C-56/41, Sector-62, Noida, Circle-10(2), Uttar Pradesh-201303. New Delhi. Pan-Aaccg6312J Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms.Chinu Bhasin, Ca Respondent By Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 15.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2022

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “C” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Gwalior Bypass Project Ltd., vs ACIT, C-56/41, Sector-62, Noida, Circle-10(2), Uttar Pradesh-201303. New Delhi. PAN-AACCG6312J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Ms.Chinu Bhasin, CA Respondent by Shri Ishtiyaque Ahmed, CIT DR Date of Hearing 15.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 26.07.2022 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi…

M/S Arkema Peroxides India Ltd., Chennai vs. The Asstt. Comissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 897/CHNY/2020[2016-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jul 2022AY 2016-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 32(1)(ii)

…in the case of Piramal Glass Limited (ITA No. 556 of 2017) relying on the above Gujarat High Court judgment, above Delhi High Court judgment in the case of Areva T & D India Limited and Apex Court judgment in the case of Techno Shares & Stocks Limited [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC) has held that no question of law sustains in connection with allowance of depreciation claim on non-compete fees. c) The Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Ingersoll Rand International Ind. Ltd. [2014] 48 taxmann.com 349 has held that right to carry on business without competition has an economic interest and money value and whenev…

Sagar Damoh Toll Roads Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3147/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesagar Damoh Toll Vs. Acit, Circle – 8(1)(2) Roads Ltd Room No. 651, 6Th 513A, 5Th Floor, Floor, Aayakar Kohinoor City, Kirol Bhavan, Mk Road, Road, Off Lbs Marg, Mumbai – 400020. Kurla, Mumbai – 400070 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacce2160Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. K. Shivaram.Ar Respondent By : Shri Ajay K. Shrivastava.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29.03.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai Passed 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. K. Shivaram.ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay K. Shrivastava.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 32(1)(ii)

…on Sagar Damoh Toll Roads Ltd, Mumbai. the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee's claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

Pune Solapur Expressways P.Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3326/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CAFor Respondent: Shri Munesh Kumar, CIT, DR

Section 250(6)Section 253Section 32

…y the CIT(A) on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Techno Shares And Stocks Ltd. (supra) is concerned it may only be noted that the said judgement has since been altered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order reported at (2010) 327 ITR 323 (SC). Accordingly, in view of the 12 aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the Ground of Appeal No. 1.1 raised by the assessee." 29. In view of our observations made in the preceding paras and also agreeing with the above reproduced findings of the Tribunal, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation on the road to collect…

Cavinkare Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 1598/CHNY/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Oct 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1597 & 1598/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S.Cavinkare Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, No. 12, Cenotaph Road, Central Circle 2(1), Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aaacb 3754B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 35

…the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Pentasoft Technologies Ltd vs DCIT, supra, where the Hon’ble Madras High Court considered relevant fact by following the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd vs CIT 327 ITR 323 held that non-compete fee paid by an assessee is in the nature of any other business or commercial right which is eligible for depreciation u/s. 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court while deciding the issue, has laid down the ratio and held that under non-compete agreement the transferor had transferred all its rights in respect of the tr…

Cavinkare Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2 (1), Chennai

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

ITA 1597/CHNY/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Oct 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1597 & 1598/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07 M/S.Cavinkare Private The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, V. Income Tax, No. 12, Cenotaph Road, Central Circle 2(1), Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai – 600 018. Pan: Aaacb 3754B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Smt. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. R. Anita, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 35

…the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Pentasoft Technologies Ltd vs DCIT, supra, where the Hon’ble Madras High Court considered relevant fact by following the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd vs CIT 327 ITR 323 held that non-compete fee paid by an assessee is in the nature of any other business or commercial right which is eligible for depreciation u/s. 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Court while deciding the issue, has laid down the ratio and held that under non-compete agreement the transferor had transferred all its rights in respect of the tr…

North Karnataka Expressway Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 4372/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2021AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No. 4372 & 4373/Mum/2012 (Assessment Years: 2005-06 & 2006-07) North Karnataka Expressway Acit – 10(1), 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd. The Il & Fs Financial Vs. Center, Plot No. C-22; G- M.K. Road, Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai 400 020 Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai- 400 051 Pan No. Aabcn3062F

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, CIT D.R

Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 234BSection 40Section 80G

…able and result in smoothly carrying on the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee's claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1593/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)

…y the CIT(A) on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Techno Shares And Stocks Ltd. (supra) is concerned it may only be noted that the said judgement has since been altered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order reported at (2010) 327 ITR 323 (SC). Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the Ground of Appeal No. 1.1 raised by the assessee." 29. In view of our observations made in the preceding paras and also agreeing with the above reproduced findings of the Tribunal, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation on the road to collect t…

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1592/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)

…y the CIT(A) on the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Techno Shares And Stocks Ltd. (supra) is concerned it may only be noted that the said judgement has since been altered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order reported at (2010) 327 ITR 323 (SC). Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the Ground of Appeal No. 1.1 raised by the assessee." 29. In view of our observations made in the preceding paras and also agreeing with the above reproduced findings of the Tribunal, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation on the road to collect t…

M/S Baul Msk Infrastructure Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 15(1)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, the aforesaid issue is restored to the file of the A.O in terms of our aforesaid directions. The Ground of appeal No. 2 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3244/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Bul Msk Infrastructure Pvt. Acit -15(1)(2), Ltd., 1008, 10Th Floor –V, Vs. Room No. 403, 4Th Floor Time Square, Plot No. 3, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Sector 14, Belapur Cbd, Mumbai 400 020 Navi Mumbai- 400614 Pan No. Aaccb9447M (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Devendra Jain, A.R Revenue By : Shri Tharian Oommen, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing : 23/03/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22/04/2021

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 36(1)(iii)

…able and result in smoothly carrying on the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee's claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

Asstt. CIT -1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Nkgsb Co. Operative Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 4928/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev WaglayFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…e same was not eligible for depreciation. The Assessing Officer after considering the submissions of the assessee and relying upon various judicial pronouncements besides the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 wherein it has been held that the asset in the nature of know–how, trade–marks, franchises, copyrights are in the nature of intellectual property right and the asset in the form of license must be in the nature of intellectual property rights only, to fall within the provisions of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. It was held that since the stock exc…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 55/PUN/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…ble and result in smoothly carrying on the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee’s claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 54/PUN/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…ble and result in smoothly carrying on the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee’s claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 53/PUN/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jan 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…ble and result in smoothly carrying on the business as part of the tool of the trade of the assessee would come within the expression “any other business or commercial right of similar nature”. 17. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v/s CIT, [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court while examining the assessee’s claim of depreciation on BSE Membership Card, after interpreting the provisions of section 32(1)(ii), held that as the membership card allows a member to participate in a trading session on the floor of the exchange, such membership is a business or commercial right, hence, similar to…

The DCIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Edelweiss Broking Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 446/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

…membership card is not an eligible asset u/s 32 of the Act as held by hon’ble Bombay high court in M/s. Technoshares and Stocks Ltd. Vs. CIT 193 Taxman 248. The CIT(A) observes that the hon’ble apex court has reversed the above stated decision as reported in 327 ITR 323 with a rider that the same relates to Bombay Stock Exchange card only. He reproduces relevant portion of this judgment as well. However, the Revenue fails to point out any distinction between the assessee’s Ahmedabad Stock Exchange card and relevant features of Bombay Stock Exchange card. Nor such a distinction is forthcoming from hon’ble apex co…

The DCIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd., ( Formerly Known Anagram Stock Broking Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 445/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

…membership card is not an eligible asset u/s 32 of the Act as held by hon’ble Bombay high court in M/s. Technoshares and Stocks Ltd. Vs. CIT 193 Taxman 248. The CIT(A) observes that the hon’ble apex court has reversed the above stated decision as reported in 327 ITR 323 with a rider that the same relates to Bombay Stock Exchange card only. He reproduces relevant portion of this judgment as well. However, the Revenue fails to point out any distinction between the assessee’s Ahmedabad Stock Exchange card and relevant features of Bombay Stock Exchange card. Nor such a distinction is forthcoming from hon’ble apex co…

M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. ( Amalgamating Company Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The Jt. CIT, Range-3, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 318/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Justice P.P. Bhatt, Hon’Ble & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 48Section 73

…membership card is not an eligible asset u/s 32 of the Act as held by hon’ble Bombay high court in M/s. Technoshares and Stocks Ltd. Vs. CIT 193 Taxman 248. The CIT(A) observes that the hon’ble apex court has reversed the above stated decision as reported in 327 ITR 323 with a rider that the same relates to Bombay Stock Exchange card only. He reproduces relevant portion of this judgment as well. However, the Revenue fails to point out any distinction between the assessee’s Ahmedabad Stock Exchange card and relevant features of Bombay Stock Exchange card. Nor such a distinction is forthcoming from hon’ble apex co…

Knight Riders Sorts P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 6675/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleknight Riders Sports Pvt. Dcit, Cc – 4(2) Ltd., Backstage, Plot Room No. 411, Aayakar बनाम/ No.612, 15Th Road, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Junction Of Ramkrishna Vs. Mumbai-400020. Mission Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai – 400054. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadck3118M .. (""यथ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri with Shri Hiten Chande, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 37(1)

…ded that the Franchise fee paid by the franchisee assessee to BCCI- IPL was in the nature of a revenue expenditure. We find that the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. & Ors. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (2010) 327 ITR 323( SC) and Jonas Woodhead And Sons (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax (1997) 224 ITR 342 (SC) relied upon by the A.O are distinguishable on facts. We find that in the case of Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. & Ors (supra) the issue before the Hon‟ble Apex Court was as to whether the right of membership conferred upon the members under the BSE m…

Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT

What is Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT

;Marie Gold Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC-8(1), Mumbai

Marie Gold Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT-CC-8(1), Mumbai

Gwalior Bypass Project Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-10(2), New Delhi

M/S Arkema Peroxides India Ltd., Chennai vs. The Asstt. Comissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle1(1), Chennai

Sagar Damoh Toll Roads Limited, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

Pune Solapur Expressways P.Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

Cavinkare Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2 (1), Chennai

Cavinkare Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Central Circle 2 (1), Chennai

North Karnataka Expressway Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Bsc C&C Kurali Toll Road Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S Baul Msk Infrastructure Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT - 15(1)(2), Mumbai

Asstt. CIT -1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Nkgsb Co. Operative Bank Ltd, Mumbai

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax, (OSD), Circle-5, Pune vs. Rohan and Rajdeep Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Pune

The DCIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Edelweiss Broking Ltd., Ahmedabad

The DCIT, Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad vs. Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd., ( Formerly Known Anagram Stock Broking Ltd., Ahmedabad

M/S. Edelweiss Broking Ltd. ( Amalgamating Company Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd.), Ahmedabad vs. The Jt. CIT, Range-3, Ahmedabad

Knight Riders Sorts P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai