← All Phrases

“depreciation on goodwill”

DepreciationSection 32Section 32346 judgments

The decision most relied on for depreciation on goodwill is CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. (348 ITR 302), cited in 540 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on depreciation on goodwill

CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd.
348 ITR 302 · 2012 · Supreme Court
540
citing judgments

Goodwill, whether arising from an amalgamation or a slump sale, is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income-tax Act. While the assessee must prove the existence and valuation of such goodwill, it is recognized as a depreciable asset.

Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT
345 ITR 421 · 2012 · High Court
97
citing judgments

Business contracts and commercial rights of similar nature qualify as intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) and are eligible for depreciation. The decision also affirms that goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation.

Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer v. Mylan Laboratories Ltd.
137 Taxmann.com 178 · 2022 · High Court
60
citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is entitled to depreciation. This principle is established by multiple High Court decisions.

Beverages 331 ITR 192 (Del) B.Raveendran Pillai v. CIT
237 Taxmann 230 · 2016 · High Court
59
citing judgments

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is an intangible asset qualifying for depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act.

Ashwin Vanaspati Industries v. CIT
255 ITR 26 · 2002 · High Court
57
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on goodwill acquired through the slump sale of a business. When an assessee claims depreciation on the enhanced cost of an asset supported by a registered valuer's report, tax authorities must produce countervailing evidence, such as a departmental valuation report, to challenge it, rather than simply disregarding the expert opinion.

Kerala Vision Ltd. v. ACIT (
35 Taxmann.com 463 · 2013 · ITAT
52
citing judgments

Transactions carried out on the purchase of off-the-shelf software prior to the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. (October 15, 2011) are not liable for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS).

Thiru Arooran Sugar Ltd. v. DCIT
350 ITR 324 · 2013 · High Court
44
citing judgments

A deduction for interest expense on borrowed funds used for interest-free advances to group companies is permissible only if the assessee establishes these advances were from surplus funds. The decision further clarifies eligibility for depreciation on intangible assets like non-compete fees, software, goodwill, and commercial rights under section 32(1)(ii), often arising from a slump sale.

Triune Energy Services (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
65 Taxmann.com 288 · 2016 · High Court
42
citing judgments

When a business is purchased as a going concern, the consideration paid in excess of the value of its tangible assets is classified as goodwill, which is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation without needing a separate valuation.

Judgments citing depreciation on goodwill

Mylan Laboratoreis Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1897/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 32

many as nine grounds, but at the time of arguments gave up all the grounds except ground No. 3 which relates to the depreciation on goodwill arising on amalgamation. Recording the same, all the grounds except ground No. 3 are dismissed. 4. On this aspect, the facts are that during ... merger took place in the financial year 2013-14 relevant for the assessment year 2014-15 in which year, the assessee claimed depreciation of goodwill and was denied. It is also not in dispute that in such initial year, the assessee challenged the denial of goodwill before the Tribunal

M/S. Croda India Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Pr. Comm of Income Tax, Mumbai-6

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1439/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 32Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35Section 43(6)

much as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue on the ground that the ld. AO had granted excess depreciation on Goodwill by computing the opening written down value of asset wrongly. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The show cause notice issued ... assessee claimed depreciation on the Goodwill from A.Y. 2012-13 onwards. The ld. PCIT in the show cause notice had alleged that the depreciation on goodwill was claimed in contravention of provisions of Explanation 5 to section 32(1) of the Act. The assessee submitted that as per the provisions

M/S. Mindtree Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 988/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 263

Rs.101,12,19,490. The case was selected for scrutiny and the AO passed an order of assessment making a disallowance of depreciation on goodwill, disallowing deduction u/s. 10AA and disallowing club expenses. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), LTU, who partly allowed the appeal

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, all three appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 488/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudan, U.A., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

returned by the assessee for the AY 2012-13. In AY 2013- 14 the AO made addition with respect to certain inadmissible expenses, depreciation on goodwill. In AY 2014-15, similar additions were made by the AO. Subsequently, the PCIT initiated the revisionary proceedings for the reason that

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, all three appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 487/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudan, U.A., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

returned by the assessee for the AY 2012-13. In AY 2013- 14 the AO made addition with respect to certain inadmissible expenses, depreciation on goodwill. In AY 2014-15, similar additions were made by the AO. Subsequently, the PCIT initiated the revisionary proceedings for the reason that

M/S. Barbeque Nation Hospitality Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, all three appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 486/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Madhusudan, U.A., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

returned by the assessee for the AY 2012-13. In AY 2013- 14 the AO made addition with respect to certain inadmissible expenses, depreciation on goodwill. In AY 2014-15, similar additions were made by the AO. Subsequently, the PCIT initiated the revisionary proceedings for the reason that

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore vs. M/S. Mindtree Limited, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1029/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 263

Rs.101,12,19,490. The case was selected for scrutiny and the AO passed an order of assessment making a disallowance of depreciation on goodwill, disallowing deduction u/s. 10AA and disallowing club expenses. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), LTU, who partly allowed the appeal

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

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

ITA 7118/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)

empanelment as a broker with various institutions/mutual funds/banks etc. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to explain why the claim of depreciation on goodwill should not be disallowed. In response thereto, the assessee submitted that the depreciation on the above mentioned intangible assets has been allowed

Mahavir Ghar Sansar Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 1(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 141/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 141/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ito-1(1)(1), Mahavir Ghar Sansar Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Private Limited, बिधम/ Road, Mumbai-400 020 19 Raj Mahal, 84, Veer Vs. Nariman Road, Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaacs7170C (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Mahita Nair, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 22.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 18.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 01.12.2021, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 263 For Ay 2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mahita Nair, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 32(1)(ii)

contemplated u/s 32(1)(ii) of I.T Act, 1961, without appreciating the facts that your appellant has paid for the goodwill and the depreciation on goodwill has been allowed by the learned C.I.T(A) in your appellant's own case for the Ass. Year 2008-2009; 2009-2010 and 2011-2012.The ... December 15, 2010 passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer accepted the slump sale and also allowed depreciation on goodwill by treating the same as intangible asset for the assessment year 2008-2009. In the assessment year 2013- 2014, the assessee is carrying

M/S United Breweries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

I.T.Act vide order dated 31.03.2016. The Assessing Officer made following disallowances / additions to the returned income of the assessee:- Particulars Amount in Rs. Depreciation on goodwill 3,73,88,587 Disallowance under section 14A 1,31,50,663 Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) 8,24,77,951 Disallowance under ... order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal, raising the following grounds:- 1. Grounds relating to Depreciation on Goodwill: 1.1 The learned CIT{A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in disallowing Depreciation of INR 3,73,88,587 on Goodwill

Infiniti Retail Ltd, Mumbai vs. Chief CIT (OSD) (I/C. Pr. CIT - 2 ), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3685/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 32(1)

whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in 2 M/s. Infiniti Retail Ltd., concluding that the assessee had made incorrect claim of depreciation on Goodwill and incorrect claim of premium on redemption of debentures in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. We have heard rival submissions ... dated 28.12.2016 as erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the. interests of the revenue. (ii) Incorrect claim of depreciation on Goodwill: During the course of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) for AY 2015-16, in this case, it was observed that the assessee company has made

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 12(5), Bangalore

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

ITA 126/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri, K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar K. Ganeshan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 43B

under CASS and notice u/s.143(2) was duly served on the assessee. The AO completed the assessment by making the following additions/disallowances:- (i) Depreciation on goodwill – Rs.6,57,08,884. (ii) Foreign royalty – Rs.8,47,948. (iii) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D – Rs.6,26,81,738. (iv) Disallowance ... Appeals). Ground no.1 and 2 are general and Ground no.10 is consequential. Hence these grounds do not warrant a separate adjudication. Depreciation on goodwill 4. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee is as follows:- ITA Nos.125 & 126/Bang/2020 Page 3 of 26 “3. Depreciation on Goodwill; 3.1 The learned CIT(Appeals

M/S. United Breweries Limited, Bangalore vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range- 12, Bangalore

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

ITA 125/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri, K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar K. Ganeshan, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 40Section 43B

under CASS and notice u/s.143(2) was duly served on the assessee. The AO completed the assessment by making the following additions/disallowances:- (i) Depreciation on goodwill – Rs.6,57,08,884. (ii) Foreign royalty – Rs.8,47,948. (iii) Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D – Rs.6,26,81,738. (iv) Disallowance ... Appeals). Ground no.1 and 2 are general and Ground no.10 is consequential. Hence these grounds do not warrant a separate adjudication. Depreciation on goodwill 4. Ground No.3 raised by the assessee is as follows:- ITA Nos.125 & 126/Bang/2020 Page 3 of 26 “3. Depreciation on Goodwill; 3.1 The learned CIT(Appeals

Franklin Templeton Management (India) P.Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -Range-6(3)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2046/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm Franklin Templeton Dy. Cit–Range 6(3)(1) Management (India) P. Ltd. Room No.506, 5 Th Floor, 12Th& 13Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, India Bulls Finance Center, Vs. Tower–2, Senapati Bapat M.K. Road, Marg, Elphinstone (W), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400013 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaact1609B Assessee By : Shri Farooq Irani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vrinda U Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri Farooq Irani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vrinda U Matkari, DR
Section 250Section 253Section 32(1)

learned CIT(A)), under section 250 of the Act, on the following grounds: Ground No. 1: Disallowance of claim of depreciation on goodwill amounting to Rs 1,47,05,938 1. The order of the learned CIT(A) is vitiated by errors of law and fact and by a failure ... learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the learned AO has erroneously stated that the Appellant has claimed depreciation on goodwill for the first time in its return of income for AY 2012-13 whereas the Appellant has been claiming depreciation on goodwill since

Merck Specialities Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2056/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 4Section 5Section 92CSection 92C(1)

disallowing depreciation of Rs. 5,19,87,305/- on the written down value of the same at the beginning of the year. 4. Depreciation on Goodwill arising from scheme of amalgamation with Bangalore Genei (India) Pvt. Ltd. Rs.5.49.87.789/–: (i) In the facts and circumstances of the case ... DRP/the Learned AO erredin not allowing the claim for depreciation of Rs. 5,49,87,789/- representing depreciation on Goodwill arising from the scheme of amalgamation with Bangalore Genel (India) Pvt. Ltd., as claimed during the course of the assessment proceedings; (ii) stating that the claim for depreciation on Goodwill

Trivitron Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1340/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1340/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 V. M/S.Trivitron Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner- “Sapthagiri Bhavan”, Of Income Tax, New No.15, Old No.25, Corporate Circle-3(1), Trivitron Sapthagiri Bhawan, Chennai. 4Th Street, Abhiramapuram, Chennai. [Pan: Aaact 9378 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Mr.M.Rajan, CIT
Section 119Section 143Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)

Seshasayee Paper Boards Ltd (2000 242 ITR 490, 500 -Madras). The CIT Appeals has set aside all the 3 issues namely Depreciation on goodwill, Provision for warranty and Disallowance under 14A read with Rule 8D to the Assessing Officer for verification. The Appellant submits: a) There is no ground ... passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous, insofar as it is prejudicial to the interests of Revenue, because the Assessing Officer has allowed depreciation on goodwill, even though 5th proviso to section 32(1) of the Act, very clearly restricts claim of depreciation to successor company on amalgamation

M/S. India Medtronics Pvt.Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, similarly the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 480/AHD/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Rajan R. Vora with Sh. Nikhil TiwariFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamath/ Akhtar Hussain Ansari
Section 234BSection 271Section 274Section 92C

failed to appreciate that the Appellant has paid Fringe Benefit Tax on said expenses”. “erred in disallowing Rs 2,30,713 being depreciation on goodwill acquired 16. at the time of purchase of assets from M/s. Medtech Devices Limited”. 17. “erred in denying the deduction of reversal of professional fees ... being revenue expenditure incurred for the development of software as capital expenditure”. “erred in upholding disallowance of Rs 3,07,617 being 18. depreciation on goodwill acquired at the time of purchase of assets from M/s. Medtech Devices Limited”. “without prejudice to above, further erred in not directing

M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2, Ltu, Bangalore

In the result, all these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2593/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri.Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 2593/Bang/2019 M/S. Te Connectivity India Private Limited, Acit, 2015-16 Te Park, 22B, Doddenakundi Corporation, Circle – 2, 2Nd Phase, Industrial Area, Large Taxpayer Unit, Whitefield Road, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560 048. Pan: Aabct 7374 C 372/Bang/2021 -Do- -Do- 2016-17 200/Bang/2022 -Do- Dcit, Ltu, 2017-18 Circle – 2, Bengaluru. 716/Bang/2022 -Do- Acit, 2018-19 Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee By : Shri Sriram Seshadri, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 23.09.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan:

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 92Section 92ASection 92F

other AYs. Those additions are subject matter of these four appeals. Apart from the above, there is also an issue of depreciation on goodwill. In the previous year relevant to AY 2014-15, the Assessee acquired by way of amalgamation another company. The excess consideration paid amounting ... application of 6th Proviso to Sec.32(1) of the Act, the Assessee submitted that the said proviso does not restrict the claim of depreciation on goodwill resulting from excess of purchase price over the fair value of assets acquired. It is intended only for apportioning the amount of depreciation between

Metallurgical Services P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT-6, Mumbai

In the result, the impugned order is set-aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 835/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 835/मुं/2021 (िन.व. 2015-16) Metallurgical Services Private Limited, Mehta House, Ashok Silk Mills Lane, Opp. Damodar Park, Off Lbs Marg, Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai 400 086 Pan: Aafcm-5665-D ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumba-6, Room No.501, 5Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : S/Shri Siddesh Chougule & Ajit Jain "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : S/Shri Amol Kirtane & Mehul Jain सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2022 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 13/09/2022 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: S/Shri Siddesh Chougule & Ajit JainFor Respondent: S/Shri Amol Kirtane & Mehul Jain
Section 263Section 92BSection 92B(1)

assessee company to Exova UK Ltd.( foreign entity) at a price less than business worth; and. (iii) Assessee’s claim of depreciation on goodwill generated on purchase of business in slump sale by the assessee from M/s. Metallurgical Services. 5. The CIT(A) has observed that the Assessing Officer ... No.3 of the appeal. The assessee succeeds on the same. 10. The next submission of the assessee is with regard to claim of depreciation on goodwill acquired under slump sale agreement. The arguments of the assessee before the PCIT in respect of depreciation on goodwill is that the goodwill represents

M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1629/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, Pan: Aaacm 9840P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.2. This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals), Bangalore-9, Bangalore Dated 31.3.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 3. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Deduction U/S. 35(2Ab) Computed On Net Expenditure As Opposed To Gross Expenditure Disallowance Of Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts I) Disallowance Of Provision For Long Term Service Award Disallowance Of Expenditure U/S. 14A Of The Act Ii) Page 2 Of 67

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 35Section 37Section 43BSection 80J

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT