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 323Supreme Court of India2010#785 most cited

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.

130

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT · 327 ITR 323 · Section 32(1)(ii) · depreciation · intangible assets · business or commercial rights · membership rights · business contracts · depreciation on software

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(2AB)Section 90 Section 234D Section 37 Section 170

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)(i)ready for use section 119(1)section 119(2)(a)section 32(1)(ii)opening wdv depreciation on software commercial rights business transfer agreement section 32(1)section 52 intangible assets

Judgments citing Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT

Mokama Munger Highway Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(4), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2145/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri D.V. AnjaneyuluFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, (CIT) DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…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 to…

Mokama Munger Highway Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1729/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri D.V. AnjaneyuluFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T. Sai, (CIT) DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2171/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

…Port and SEZ lands with uses of infrastructure facility to carry out the business activities. The term license, easement and lease were well defined under Transfer of Property Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stock Ltd. vs. CIT 327 ITR 323 has held that such rights were akin to license. It give the right to member to access the exchange and it was considered to be an intangible asset. In this way the appellant has been given the right to carry out its terminal operations. Thus it is nothing but a license which is in the nature of commercial right. It may be noted that licenses/fran…

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Mundra International Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd., Kutch

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1117/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alok Singh, CIT-D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 32

Valecha Badwani Sendhwa Tollways Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 11, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed

ITA 2848/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhvalecha Badwani Sendhwa Pcit-11 Tollways Ltd. 4Th Floor, R.No. 417, Aayakar Bhavan, Valecha Chambers, Andheri M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. New Link Road, Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400053. Pan: Aadcv6105B Appellant Respondent Valecha Lm Tools Pvt. Ltd. Pcit-11 4Th Floor, Valecha Chambers, R.No. 417, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri New Link Road, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (W), Vs. Mumbai-400053. Pan: Aadcv2787M Appellant Respondent : Shri Sumant Chadha With Appellant By Mr. Jitendra Trivedi (Ar) Respondent By : Shri S.K. Poddar (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.04.2019

For Respondent: Shri Sumant Chadha with

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 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 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 to…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Landmark Cars (East) Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2419/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2419/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Rajesh Meena, Sr. DR

…amount over and above of the net tangible asset was treated as goodwill and the Delhi High Court has allowed the depreciation claim on such goodwill following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stock Limited Vs. CIT [2010] 327 ITR 323 and CIT Vs. Hindustan Coco-cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. [2011] 331 ITR 192. ITA No.2419/Ahd/2016 [DCIT vs. M/s. Landmark Cars (East) Pvt. Ltd.] A.Y. 2013-14 - 6 - 3.14. Since in the case of appellant, intangible assets in the form of business and commercial rights such as dealership, readymade infrastructure including working process, procedures, tra…

West Gujarat Exressway Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 3668/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. West Gujarat Vs. Dcit – 14(3)1 Expressway Ltd., (Erstwhile Dy. The Il & Fs Financial Commissioner Of Income Center, Plot No.C-22, G Tax – 10(1), Room No.460 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Maharshi Karve Road Mumbai – 400 051 Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacw5862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dcit – 14(3)1 Vs. M/S. West Gujarat Expressway Room No.453 Ltd., 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan The Il & Fs Financial Center, M.K. Marg Plot No.C-22, G Block, Bandra- Mumbai – 400 020 Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaacw5862D (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

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

…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 to…

Huntsman International (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1099/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year : 2012-13 Huntsman International (India) Acit 10(1)(1), Private Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Light Hall B-Wing, Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 072

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “K”, MUMBAI Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year : 2012-13 Huntsman International (India) ACIT 10(1)(1), Private Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Light Hall B-Wing, Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 072 PAN AAACH9149J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri F V Irani Respondent By : Shri Rignesh Das Date of Hearing :04.09.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 12.09.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member This appeal by the assessee is directed against the assessment order dated 17.01.2017…

Gateway Distriparks(Kerala) Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT, Cochin

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

ITA 216/COCH/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.216/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Gateway Distriparks (Kerala) Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., Door No. 26/1804, Income-Tax, Circle-1(2), Kochi Chakiat House, Subramaniam Road, Willington Island, Kochi-682 003. [Pan:Aaccg 6616P] (Assessee-Appellant) (Revenue-Respondent) Assessee By Shri P.M. Veeramani, Ca Revenue By Smt. A.S. Bindhu, Dr Date Of Hearing 14/08/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2018

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…and for this proposition, he relied on the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. A.L. Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2015) (374 ITR 609). 4.3 The Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Techno Stocks and Shares Ltd vs CIT (327 ITR 323) wherein it was held that 'the right of membership was a "business or commercial right" and could be said to be owned by the assessee and used for business purposes in terms of section 32(l)(ii) . The right of membership, which included the right of nomination, was a "licence" or "akin to a licence" which was one of the items which fell in sectio…

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

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 77/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rk Panda & And Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2010-11 M/S Container Corporation Acit, Circle 6(2) Vs. Of India Ltd. New Delhi Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A A.Y. 2010-11 Dcit, Circle 3(1) M/S Container Vs. New Delhi Corporation Of India Ltd. Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 32Section 80

…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 1961 Act". 13. In the present case, applying the principle of ejusdem generis, which provides that where there are general words following particular and specific words…

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

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 186/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Section 14ASection 32Section 80

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Progressive Constructions Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 289/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Jul 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Progressive Constructions Vs. Tax, Circle – 16(2), Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad Pan – Aabcp 2274 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt. Geetha ChellappaFor Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas

Section 14ASection 36(1)(v)

…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…

DCIT - 9(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Atlanta Infra Assets Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4769/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Dy. Commisioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Limited Tax – 9(1)(2) 101, Shree Amba Shanti Room No.260A, Chambers Mumbai Andheri Kurla Road Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 Pan/Gir No. Aaccb7416Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Co No.19/Mum/2018 M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 101, Shree Amba Shanti Chambers Tax – 9(1)(2) Andheri Kurla Road Room No.260A, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aaccb7416Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue By Shri H.N. Singh Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta Date Of Hearing 13/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2018

For Respondent: - i) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 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…

Second Vivekananda Bridge Tollywayco.Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-2(2), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed accordingly

ITA 19/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri, M. Balaganeshassessment Year :2012-13 Second Vivekananda V/S. Dcit, Circle-2(2), Bridge Tollway Co. Pvt. Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Ltd., Block Gp, Sector-V, Chowringhee Square, Salt Lake Electronics Kolkata-69 Complex, Kolkata-91 [Pan No.Aahcs 8573 Q] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri S. Rudra, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri G. Hangshing, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 21-06-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 11-07-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Calls Into Question The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata’S Order Dated 04.11.2016 Passed In Case No.1221/Cit(A)-1/C-2(2)/2015-16 Upholding Assessing Officer’S Action Disallowing Its Depreciation Claimed Of ₹41,99,22,054 In Respect Of Licence To Collect The Toll Revenue Of The Second Vivekananda Bridge (Treated As The Relevant Intangible Asset) & Disallowing Leave Encashment Provision Of ₹1,84,562/- U/S 43B(F) In Assessment Order Dated 11.05.2015, Involving Proceeding U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short As ‘The Act’. 2. We Come To Former Issue Of Depreciation Disallowance In Respect Of Assessee’S Licence To Collect Toll Charges On The Second Vivekananda Bridge.

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 43B

…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”. 25 M/s. Progressive Constructions Ltd. 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…

DCIT (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Imcd Group B.V. India Branch, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1544/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S Imcd Group B.V. India Tax (It)-2(2)(1), Room No. 136, Branch, C/O Vatsaraj & Co., बिधम/ 1St Floor Scindia House, 1St Floor, Fort Chambers, Vs. N.M. Road, Mumbai-400 038 “C” Block, 65 Tamarind Lane Fort, Mumbai-400 023 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabci8417R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Samuel Darse, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Raghunathan Sampath. A.R

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

…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 P a g e | 8 ITA No. 1544/Mum/2016 AY. 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner of Income tax Vs. M/s IMCD Group BV India 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 un…

Gmr Airport Developers Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 806/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain &For Respondent: Shri M. Naveen, DR

…trademark and artistic work and therefore, these are ‘intangible assets’ exploited by assessee and used for the purpose of business and hence following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd., Vs. CIT [327 ITR 323] (SC) the amount of license fee to be paid is eligible for depreciation in terms of Section 32(1)(ii). Assessee also placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Areva T&D India Ltd., Vs. DCIT [345 ITR 421] (Delhi) and ITAT, Bangalore :- 6 -: I.T.A. No. 806/Hyd/2017 Decision in the case of Bosch Ltd., Vs. ACIT…

ACIT - 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Progressive Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5317/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2009-10 Acit-4(2)(1), M/S Progressive Share Room No.642, 6Th Floor, Brokers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, B, 1St Floor, Fort Chambers, Vs. M. K. Road, Homi Modi Cross Street, Mumbai-400020 Off. Hamam Street, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No.Aaacp6712H

Section 14ASection 43(5)Section 73

…the assessment year 2008-09. We notice that the Tribunal has allowed the similar claim of the assessee for depreciation on BSE/NSE cards following the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2010] 327 ITR 323 (SC). Respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the own case of the assessee, we allow this issue in favour of the assessee. Ground B : Disallowance of lease rentals paid on motor vehicles During the year under consideration, the assessee had paid lease rentals to M/s. Orix Infrastructure Services Private L…

Bayer Cropscience Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7619/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla, A.R. &For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swarup, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)

…or commercial right" and thus, eligible for depreciation under section 32 of the Act. 2.3.8.6 Reliance is placed on the following case laws where the meaning of “business and commercial right” has been elaborated: • Techno Shares & Stocks Ltd. & Ors. vs. CIT [327 ITR 323] (SC) • Skyline Caterers (P) Ltd. vs. ITO [118 TTJ 344] (Mumbai Tribunal) • Kotak Forex Brokerage Ltd. vs. ACIT [33 SOT 237] (Mumbai Tribunal) • ACIT vs. American Express Services India Ltd. [ITA 74/2003 ITA 75/2003 ITA 653/2005] (Mumbai Tribunal) • ITO vs Medicorp Technologies India Ltd. [122 TTJ 394] (Chennai Tribunal) 29 M/s. Bayer CropScienc…

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

In the result appeals filed by the assessee for both the Assessment Years stand allowed

ITA 5101/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rs Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 & A.Y. 2008-09

Section 143Section 154Section 32

…nts, copyrights, trade marks, licences, franchises". It was urged that the Supreme Court had Page 5 of 10 ITA 5098/Del/14 A.Y. 2007-08 & 5101/Del/14 A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Container Corpn. Of India Ltd. vs. DCIT 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 1961 Act". 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 appeals filed by the assessee for both the Assessment Years stand allowed

ITA 5098/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rs Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2007-08 & A.Y. 2008-09

Section 143Section 154Section 32