“going concern”

Judicial DoctrinesSlump SaleSlump Sale477 judgments

The decision most relied on for going concern is Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT (345 ITR 421), cited in 97 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on going concern

Areva T&D India Ltd. v. DCIT

345 ITR 421 · 2012 · High Court

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.

Triune Energy Services (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

65 Taxmann.com 288 · 2016 · High Court

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.

Harshad J.Choksi v. CIT, Bombay City- VII

25 Taxmann.com 567 · 2012 · High Court

citing judgments

The conditions for claiming a bad debt deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) read with Section 36(2) are not fulfilled if the assessee fails to provide details of the parties associated with the debts or evidence that these amounts were offered to tax in earlier years. An alternate claim for loss under Section 28 is denied without evidence substantiating the loss in the relevant assessment year.

L.Ve. Vairavan Chettiar v. CIT

72 ITR 114 · 1969 · High Court

citing judgments

A business concern can still be considered to be carrying on its business even if there are long intervals of inactivity, provided it is kept alive, retains its registered office, and holds meetings. It is not necessary for a business to have work constantly to be considered in existence.

Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. v. DCIT

34 Taxmann.com 9 · 2013 · High Court

citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on goodwill, even if it's considered an intangible asset representing future profits, following the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd.

Bharat Hari Singhania v. CWT

19 SOT 612 · 2008 · High Court

citing judgments

While the case involves a reference to "fresh tangible material", "valuation of shares", "going concern", and "indexed cost of acquisition", the provided passages do not clearly articulate the specific holding of Bharat Hari Singhania v. CWT.

Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT, 313 ITR (AT) 263 (SB)

110 ITD 59 · 2008 · ITAT

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer cannot improve his assessment by adopting a new theory during reassessment proceedings.

CIT v. Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd.

291 ITR 362 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on standby machinery that is kept ready for use, even if not actually put to use due to reasons such as raw material paucity. This is permissible as long as the business is a going concern.

Judgments citing going concern

Thermo Fisher Scientific India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 15(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2458/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Shri Amol MahajanFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 32(1)

sides and perused the material available on record. During the assessment year 2008-09, the assessee acquired by way of slump sale on a going concern basis the Qualigens Fine Chemicals Division from GSK Pharma Ltd. Further, during the assessment year 2009-10, the assessee acquired on a slump sale ... assessee in two transaction of acquisition of two units. The assessee claimed that those acquisitions are for purchase of unit for lumpsum consideration, as going concerns in the nature of slump sale, which is subject to capital gain tax us 50B in the hand of seller. Whereas the according

Shri Ram Multicom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC - 3(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 501/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Asst. Commissioner Of Income Shri Ram Multicom Private Tax, Central Circle 3(4) Limited Aaykar Bhavan, 110, Ideal Centre, Unit No.3, 3 Rd Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Vs. Floor, 9 A.J.C. Bose Road Kolkata-700107, Kolkata-700017, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecs5277N Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury & Shri Nirav Sheth, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR

Section 142(1)Section 144

firm having PAN No. AAVFS8066R under jurisdiction of DCIT Circle 3(4), Kolkata vide agreement dated 01.04.2008. The said firm was taken over as going concern and merged with Shri Ram Multicom Pvt. Ltd. (AAECS5277N) under jurisdiction of the DCIT Circle 7(2), Kolkata. The notice

Aditya Birla Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax - 2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4821/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar & Ms. S.Jayaram, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, (CIT DR)

Section 135Section 143(3)Section 32Section 43BSection 80G

submitted that the assessee has taken over the business in relation to Information Technology Outsourcing services from XBSIPL as a going concern on slump sale basis, pursuant to the agreement dated 24.3.2015 for a consideration of Rs.98,09,65,904. Out of the total consideration, Rs.93,51,41,592 represents ... under: “Wealth Management Undertaking” shall mean the Demerged Company's undertakings, business, activities and operations pertaining to the Wealth Management Business on a going concern basis and shall mean and include without limitation: (ix) all benefit/obligations related to tax i.e., Advance Tax, Tax deducted at source, Tax credits (including

ACIT, Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

with the undertaking along with the related liabilities, licenses and intangible assets and all the employees of the said division stood transferred on a going concern basis to the buyer by way of slump sale for a lump sum consideration. It was brought to our notice that, the ITA Nos.2330 ... PRICE: 3.1. The purchase price/consideration ("Purchase Price") payable by the Buyer to the Seller, for the transfer and sale of the Division as a going concern on slump sale basis is divided into two parts - viz., i. Immediate consideration of Rs.93,00,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety-Three Crores only

Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

ITA 2330/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2330/Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaca 4651 L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Acit, Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2618/Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Acit, Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai. V. M/S. Ashok Leyland Ltd., 1, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aaaca 4651 L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By : Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, Adv. & Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Adv. Department By : Mr.A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

with the undertaking along with the related liabilities, licenses and intangible assets and all the employees of the said division stood transferred on a going concern basis to the buyer by way of slump sale for a lump sum consideration. It was brought to our notice that, the ITA Nos.2330 ... purchase price/consideration ("Purchase Price") payable by the Buyer to the Seller, for the transfer and sale of the Division as a going concern on slump sale basis is divided into two parts - viz., i. Immediate consideration of Rs.93,00,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety-Three Crores only) to be paid

Ssnc Fintech Services India Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly

ITA 916/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: CA, Ketan K. VedFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 920

liabilities of ICIL on an after the appointed date and prior to the effective date have been transferred to Infosys Limited on a going concern basis. As ICIL was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Infosys Limited, no shares have been allotted to the shareholders upon the scheme becoming effective

Dai-Ichi Karkaria Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ground no. 4 of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1588/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 254(1)Section 270A

year under consideration while computing the total income. ICDS-I relating to accounting policy mandates the assessee company to follow fundamental accounting assumption of going concern consistency and accrual of liability. The assessee has present obligation as a result of past event in case of assessee there is substantial degree

ITO Ward 2(1), Kolkata vs. Infinity Housing Proojects Pvt Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 841/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am Infinity Housing Projects Pvt. Ltd. Ito Ward 2(1), Kolkata Plot-13, Block-Gp, Salt Lake P-7, Chowringhee Square, City, Sector-V, Kolkata-700091 Vs. Aaykar Bhavan,Kolkata-700069 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabci7965C Assessee By : Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Ar Revenue By : Shri P.N. Barnwal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 24.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR

Section 68

that the issue of the share capital which has been raised by the AO is clearly out of its sisters concerns which is a going concern and is in the business of real estate and the evidences have also been produced before the ld. Assessing Officer. The statements

Gowtham Residential Junior College, Vijayawada vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 26/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

hence should be considered as business income. Ld.AR further submitted that the premises was given on lease along with its infrastructure as a going concern and shall be revived after a short period. Ld.AR also relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2009-10 wherein

Gowtham Residential Junior College, Vijayawada vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Vijayawada

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 25/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Section 255(4)

ACIT, Circle Ltu-1, Chennai vs. Carborundum Universal Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 140/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

submissions on this issue. The same is reproduced below: During the Assessment Year 2007-08, the assessee Company acquired two units at Jabalpur on going concern basis for a consideration of Rs.320 lakhs, which includes the intangible asset towards Brand amounting to Rs.16 lakhs. The assessee company claimed depreciation

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Ltu-1, Chennai vs. Carborundum Universal Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 139/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

ACIT, Ltu Circle 1 Chennai, Chennai vs. Carborundum Universal Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 117/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita Nos. 139, 140 & 117/Chny/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2018-19)

For Appellant: Ms. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan

Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

ACIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi vs. Core Minerals, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stand allowed

ITA 215/RAN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathanshri George Mathan & Ratnesh Nandan Sahay & Ratnesh Nandan Sahay & Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Mohan Dass/Tharis V, ARsFor Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, CIT DR

Section 41(1)

would not be permissible for the assessee to revalue its closing stock. On appeal, ld CIT(A) held that the assessee is a going concern and consequently held that the assessee is entitled to revaluation of the closing stock leading to devaluation. It was the submission that the order ... income of the assessee. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. Ld CIT(A) has categorically given a finding tat the assessee is a going concern. The revenue has not been able to point out how the revenue is holding that the business of the assessee has come

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Trichy vs. Kumarasamy Ramakrishnan, Karur

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3321/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri A. Sasikumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri.M.V.Prasad, C.A.&

Section 3Section 801ASection 801A(3)(ii)Section 80I

down in section 80IA(3)(ii) at the time of their formation by the previous owners and the transfer of the such undertakings as going concerns to the assessee by the previous owners did not result in violation of the condition in section 801A ... down in section 80IA(3)(ii) at the time of their formation by the previous owners and the transfer of the such undertakings as going concerns to the assessee by the previous owners did not result in violation of the condition in section 80IA(3)(ii). 3.2 The Ld.CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Trichy vs. Kumarasamy Ramakrishnan, Karur

ITA 3316/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपीलसं/.Ita Nos.:3315, 3316 & 3321/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years: 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Taxх, Central Circle -1, Trichy. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Vs. Shri Kumarasamy Ramakrishnan, Ramakrishna Poultry Farm, No.79, Main Road, Thalavapalayam, Karur, Tamil Nadu – 639 113. [Pan:Aagpr-3421-A] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकी ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit प्रत्यर्थीकी ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri.M.V.Prasad, C.A.& Shri.K.S.Rajendra Kumar, C.A. सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per S. R. Raghunatha: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, Dated 07.10.2024, 04.10.2024 &04.10.2024And Pertain To Assessment Years 2019-20, 2020-21&2018-19 Respectively. Since, Facts Are Identical & Issues Are Common, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Being Heard Together & Disposed Off, By This Consolidated Order. :-2-:

For Appellant: Shri A. Sasikumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri.M.V.Prasad, C.A.&

Section 3Section 801ASection 801A(3)Section 801A(3)(ii)Section 80I

down in section 801A(3)(ii) at the time of their formation by the previous owners and the transfer of the such undertakings as going concerns to the assessee by the previous owners did not result in violation of the condition in section 801A ... down in section 801A(3)(ii) at the time of their formation by the previous owners and the transfer of the such undertakings as going concerns to the assessee by the previous owners did not result in violation of the condition in section 801A(3)(ii). 3.2 The Ld.CIT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Trichy vs. Kumarasamy Ramakrishnan, Karur

ITA 3315/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri A. Sasikumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri.M.V.Prasad, C.A.&

Section 3Section 801ASection 801A(3)Section 801A(3)(ii)Section 80I

DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Rvr Enterprises (Successful Bidder of M/S Chadalavada Infratech Ltd.), Hyderabad

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

ITA 782/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA Satya DinakarFor Respondent: Shri Narender Kumar Naik

Section 143(3)

liquidation of the appellant company. Subsequently, the business of the 4 ITA.No.782/Hyd./2024 appellant company was purchased by the present management on a going concern from the Liquidator on 06.04.2023. Since the liability of the Department pertains to date prior to the date of liquidation of the company ... present management has purchased the company from the Liquidator as a going concern basis for a consideration of Rs.80 lakhs, the previous liabilities including income tax liability, if any, shall extinguish and, therefore, the appeal of the Department is not maintainable and needs to be dismissed. 7. We have heard

Arvind Fashions Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The PCIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 913/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

with Arvind Lifestyle Brands Limited (ALBL) on 21-10-2016 whereby ALBL agreed to sell, transfer, convey, assign, deliver the business undertaking as a going concern and on a Slump Sale basis for a consideration of Rs. 2,53,25,08,028/-, out of which it the value of Intangible ... with Arvind Lifestyle Brands Ltd. (ALBL) on 21-10-2016 whereby ALBL agreed to sell, transfer, convey, assign, deliver the business undertaking as a going concern on a Slump Sale basis for a consideration of Rs. 2,53,25,08,028/- out of which the value of Intangible assets transferred

Isc Speciality Chemicals LLP, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 457/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 45Section 47Section 47A(4)Section 48Section 50BSection 56

that, even if a transfer was to be assumed to have taken place, then as the assets was transferred as an undertaking on a going concern basis of the company, no separate cost other than the book value was 5 ITA NO 457/Mum/2025 AY: 2018-19 ISC Specialty Chemicals