“opening WDV”

DepreciationSection 43(6)Section 43(6)263 judgments

The decision most relied on for opening WDV is ACIT v. Progressive Constructions Ltd. (92 Taxmann.com 104), cited in 63 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on opening WDV

ACIT v. Progressive Constructions Ltd.

92 Taxmann.com 104 · 2018 · ITAT

citing judgments

Rights acquired under a concession agreement for highway construction, which generate revenue through toll collections, constitute an 'intangible asset' under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, eligible for depreciation, typically at 25%. This includes claiming depreciation on the opening Written Down Value (WDV) for such highway projects.

CIT v. Artex Manufacturing Co.

227 ITR 260 · 1997 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

In a slump sale, the slump purchase price cannot be apportioned among individual assets for claiming depreciation, as there is no indication of the price attributable to specific assets out of the total sale consideration.

DCIT v. Toyo Engineering India ltd.

33 Taxmann.com 560 · 2013 · Reported

citing judgments

Depreciation is not allowed on goodwill if it arises from book entries and has no identifiable cost of acquisition. This applies even when goodwill is acquired as part of a scheme of arrangement or amalgamation.

Bodal Chemicals Ltd. v. ACIT, Ahmedabad

112 Taxmann.com 217 · 2019 · ITAT

citing judgments

Once depreciation on an asset is allowed in the first year, the revenue is debarred from denying depreciation on the written-down value carried forward in subsequent years, absent a change in facts or law.

PCIT v. GVK Jaipur Expressway

100 Taxmann.com 96 · 2018 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

The Supreme Court has affirmed that developers of roadways, operating on a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) basis, are eligible to claim depreciation on the roads constructed. This decision supports the assessee's claim against the Revenue's challenge.

Judgments citing opening WDV

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1186/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H. Phani Raju, CIT-DR & Shri

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

year. The CIT(A) concluded that the disallowance of depreciation on fixed assets for the current year was unwarranted. The disallowance related to the opening WDV, based on previous years, had already been deleted in the respective appeals, and the current year’s addition to fixed assets was well supported ... disallowance made by the AO in prior years had already been deleted in appeals for those years, and the same reasoning applies to the opening WDV carried forward to the current year. 32. Given that the CIT(A) has already conducted a detailed verification of the invoices and found them

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

ITA 1916/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Deputy Director of Income Tax vide ITA No. 2028/ Mum/ 2019, the ITAT Mumbai has held that the assessing officer cannot dispute the opening WDV of block asset after having allowed the depreciation in the immediately preceding years and does not open to the assessing officer to take different stand

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

ITA 1872/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

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

ITA 1711/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

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

ITA 1613/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

Todi Industries Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 8(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 895/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 37

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT

ACIT Circle-16(1), Delhi vs. Mahashian Di Hatti Private Limited, Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1484/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhasstt. Yr: 2017-18

Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271ASection 44A

confronted the same u/s 142(1) of the Act. In response the assessee accepted the inadvertent mistake stating that the opening WDV for AY 2017-18 was inadvertently taken as per the book value of the asset rather than the closing WDV for AY 2016-17. Assessee also offered ... there is no change in the value of the assets purchased during the year and the error just a clerical oversight 4 in the opening WDV balance as out of the two correct WDVs under the two different Acts, one instead of the other was got picked

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

have erred in disallowing the depreciation of Rs.233,07,94,409/- by applying the depreciation rate applicable for SLM method of depreciation to the opening WDV of the asset when the same was to be applied to the actual cost of assets. 09. That

Jaipur Engineering College Jaipur Rajasthan Society, Jaipur vs. Circle (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 261/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(3)Section 164(2)

without understanding the contention of the assessee has observed at Para 12.1 of its order that assessee has claimed depreciation on the opening WDV but in defense claimed that the AO has not allowed the capital expenditure of current year as an application of income but silent on what happened

Dy. CIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Asian Paints Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for A

ITA 3083/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dy CIT Circle -3(4), Mumbai vs. Asian Paints Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and Revenue for

ITA 3063/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dy CIT Circle 3(4), Mumbai vs. Asian Paints, Mumbai

ITA 2936/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Asian Paints Limited, Santacruz vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu Circle 2, Cuffe Parade

ITA 2700/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 50Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Asian Paints Limited, Santacruz vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu Circle 1, Cuffe Parade

ITA 2697/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 50Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Asian Paints Limited, Santacruz vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

ITA 2696/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(43)Section 35Section 40Section 50Section 80GSection 90

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Tek Systems Global Services Private Limited, Hyderbad vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderbad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 487/HYD/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.487/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Tek Systems Global Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Services (P) Ltd, Circle 2(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Aabcf1518Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms. K. Amulya, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya, Cit-Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/05/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 05/07/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Ms. K. Amulya, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 270A

consequence of disregarding the said Goodwill. 3. In light of the above, the disallowed the depreciation claimed in the Impugned AY, on the opening WDV of the block of intangible assets comprising of the said Goodwill. In this back around, the key submissions made during the hearing before Your Honours ... Intangible Assets' in AY 2017-18. 6. Hence, the depreciation claimed under section g2() of the Act, for the Impugned AY on the Opening WDV of the said block of assets, is consequential and mandatory under the provisions of the Act. 7. Reliance in this regard is placed

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara vs. Gujarat Insecticides Limited, Ankleshwar

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1035/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Asstt.Commissioner Of Gujarat Insecticides Limited Income Tax Vs Plot No.805/806, Gidc Estate Circle-2(1)(1) Ankleshwar Vadodara Bharuch – 393 002 Pan: Aaacg 8436 D अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) … "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arti Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld.Cit(A)”) Dated 19/10/2023, Arising Out Of An Appeal Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”) Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. Facts Of The Case: The Acit Vs. Gujarat Insecticides Ltd. Asst. Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Ms. Arti Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 31Section 32(1)(ia)

year of purchasing the new plant and machinery, the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim of additional depreciation on the brought forward opening WDV and added the same to the total income of the assessee. ……………………. ……………………. The ACIT vs. Gujarat Insecticides Ltd. Asst. Year : 2015-16 14 “6. in view

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 74/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 35

claim of the assessee is found to be correct, then the assessee is entitled to depreciation on this amount and accordingly depreciation on opening WDV of this asset should be allowed to the assessee in this year. 11.3 As regard disallowance of depreciation of Rs.68,96,075/-, the assessee

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 53/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 35

Keventer Agro Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

ITA 396/KOL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32Section 37(1)Section 43B

also evident from para 5 of the IT AT order in appellant’s own case at page 114 of the paper book. The opening WDV of assets for the subject assessment year, being AY 2015- 16 has thus been arrived at only after reduction of the entire amount of grants