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)

M/S Bgse Financials Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 3130/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 30Section 37

…). The Compilation of case laws (ii) are judicial pronouncements that are not cited before the first appellate authority. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand, relied on the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Techno Shares and Stock Ltd. reported in 327 ITR 323 (SC). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Section 37 of the Act provides that an expenditure (not being an expenditure of nature described in section 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee) laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose…

Vodafone India Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 8, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3327/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shriramlal Negi, Jm Vodafone India Ltd., Principal Commissioner Of Income Peninsula Corporate Park, Tax-8, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Room No. 611, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Parel, Mumbai-400013. Road, Mumbai, Maharastra, Pin- 400020. Pan: Aaach 5332 B Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 263Section 32(1)Section 35ASection 37

…i As regards allowability of depreciation on fees paid for acquisition of 3G spectrum, reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements:- 1. Idea Cellular Ltd. (ITA No.360/Mum/2016) [Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal] 2. Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. 327 ITR 323 (SC) 3. CIT vs Smifs Securities Ltd, 348 ITR 302 (SC) 10. Inviting out attention to the order passed by the AO, the ld. AR of the assessee contended that the AO has conducted detailed enquiries during the course of the proceedings then change of opinion by merely reappraising evidence is not within the parameters of revisional jurisdiction under…

Goldmohur Design and Apparel Park Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. Comm. of Income Tax - 7, Mumbai

ITA 3971/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodgoldmohar Design & Pr. Cit-7 R. No. 628, 6Th Floor, Apparel Park Ltd. 145, Goldmohar Mill, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Dada Saheb Phalke Road, Mumbai – 400 020 Dadar (E), Mumbai- 400 014 Pan – Aadcg1613M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Shri. T. Kipgen &

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ts along with the tangible assets, the assessee got an up and running business. The Hon‘ble High Court while concluding as hereinabove had drawn support from the judgment of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT, (2010) 327 ITR 323, wherein it was held that intangible assets owned by the assessee and used for the business purpose which enables the assessee to access the market and has an economic and money value is a "license" or "akin to a license" which is one of the items falling in Sec. 32(1)(ii) of the Act. In the backdrop of its aforesaid observations, the Hon‘ble Hig…

Neptune Securities Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(3)(4), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 738/AHD/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2020AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, with Shri P.B. Parmar, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri Deelip Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 234Section 271

…aside the finding of the learned CIT (A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law by observing as under: Since the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. (327 ITR 323) is applicable with regard to rules and by-laws of Bombay Stock Exchange governing membership card. It is not clear whether the rules of Bombay Stock Exchange and that of the Ahmedabad Stock Exchange are similar, therefore under these facts, the issue is restored back to the file of AO to make verification with regard to the rules of Bombay stock…

Knight Riders Sports P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4389/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 4389/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/S. Knight Riders Sports Private Limited, Backstage, Plot No.612, 15Th Road, Junction Of Ramakrishna Mission Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai 400 054. Pan: Aadck3118M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate with Shri Hitendra Chanda &For Respondent: S/Shri Narendra Singh & Jangapanji

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

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ एच ”, मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस. "रफौर रहमान, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं. 4389/मुं/2015 ("न.व. 2011-12) M/s. Knight Riders Sports Private Limited, Backstage, Plot No.612, 15th Road, Junction of Ramakrishna Mission Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai 400 054. PAN: AADCK3118M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle – 29, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपी…

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Sambalpur vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur

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

ITA 174/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.174/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015 - 2016) Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), Sambalpur Jagriti Vihar, Burla, Sambalpur स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aabcm 5188 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.S.Podar, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, Citdr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/01/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Podar, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CITDR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 35ESection 37Section 37(1)

…gh the gestation periods whereas by acquiring the aforesaid business along with the tangible assets, the assessee got an up and running business. This view is fortified by the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. V. CIT, 327 ITR 323 wherein it was held that intangible assets owned by the assessee and used for the business purpose which enables the assessee to access the market and has an economic and money value is a "license" or "akin to a license" which is one of the items falling in s 32(1)(ii) of the Act and were accordingly eligible for depreciation under that Section.…

Phillip (India) P.Ltd ( Formelry Mf Global (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, Ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3016/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar & MsFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 30Section 32

…eers India Ltd. 239 ITR 237. 10. Further he pleaded that in case, these expenses are considered as capital, assessee should be allowed to claim depreciation and in this respect, he relied on the decision in the case of Swaws Credit Corporation India vrs. DCIT 327 ITR 323. 11. On the other hand, Ld. DR brought to our notice para 3.11 & 3.12 and 4.5 of the order of Ld. CIT(A) and relied on the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 22 I.T.A. No. 3016/Mum/2013 Phillip (India) Pvt. Ltd. 12. Considered the rival submission and material placed on record. We notice from the record that AO has disallowed the service…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Container Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2332/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv

Section 80I

…ilar nature" used in Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) has to take colour from the preceding words "know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises". It was urged that the Supreme Court had clearly held in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC) that "Our judgment should not be understood to mean that every business or commercial right would constitute a "licence" or a "franchise" in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the 1961Act". 13. In the present case, applying the principle of ejusdem generis, which provides that where there are general words following particular and specific words…

M/S. Container Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 748/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv

Section 80I

…ilar nature" used in Explanation 3(b) to section 32(1) has to take colour from the preceding words "know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises". It was urged that the Supreme Court had clearly held in Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC) that "Our judgment should not be understood to mean that every business or commercial right would constitute a "licence" or a "franchise" in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the 1961Act". 13. In the present case, applying the principle of ejusdem generis, which provides that where there are general words following particular and specific words…

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

…is relatable to the transfer of trade mark, copy rights and patents. Therefore, the view taken by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in this regard is acceptable. 23. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 327 ITR 323 (SC), the assessee therein before the Hon’ble Apex Court claimed depreciation on the membership card held by it with the Bombay Stock Exchange enables it to trade on the floor, is a business or commercial right in the nature of a licence under Section 32 (1)(ii) of the Act. 24. The Department on the other hand, pointed out that membership is a pe…

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

…is relatable to the transfer of trade mark, copy rights and patents. Therefore, the view taken by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) in this regard is acceptable. 23. In the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 327 ITR 323 (SC), the assessee therein before the Hon’ble Apex Court claimed depreciation on the membership card held by it with the Bombay Stock Exchange enables it to trade on the floor, is a business or commercial right in the nature of a licence under Section 32 (1)(ii) of the Act. 24. The Department on the other hand, pointed out that membership is a pe…

Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5938/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu() : A.Y : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas

Section 2Section 255(4)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 45Section 47Section 50Section 55(2)(ab)

…ired by it on payment of Rs. 94.50 Lakhs as ‘intangible right’ and claimed depreciation on the same, which was disallowed by the Revenue. The issue of claim of depreciation was ultimately settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the assessee's case reported in 327 ITR 323, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the membership card acquired by the assessee was an intangible asset as per Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the assessee was claiming depreciation on such assets and the Written Down Value (“WDV”) of the membership card as on 31st March 2005 was Rs. 12,61,422/-. 3. In the meantime, it was p…

Asst CIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Essel Sagar Damoh Toll Roads, Mumbai

ITA 7114/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodasstt. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Cir)- M/S Essel Sagar Damoh Toll Roads Ltd. 6(2)(2), Room No. 563, Aayakar Bhavan, 135, Continental Build. A.B. Road, M.K. Road, Churchgate Vs. Mumbai – 400018 Mumbai- 400 020. Pan – Aacce2160Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri RiteshMisra, D.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Shivram, A.R

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

…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…