← All Phrases

“demerger”

Mergers & RestructuringSection 2(19AA)Section 2(19AA)492 judgments

The decision most relied on for demerger is CIT v. Sonata Software Ltd. (21 Taxmann.com 23), cited in 54 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on demerger

CIT v. Sonata Software Ltd.
21 Taxmann.com 23 · 2012 · High Court
54
citing judgments

The case clarifies the negative conditions for Section 10A exemption, requiring an industrial undertaking not be formed by splitting up an existing business or using previously used machinery. It also establishes that tax benefits under provisions like Section 80J and 80IA attach to the undertaking itself, allowing successor entities to claim the unexpired benefit period.

CIT v. Micra India (P) Ltd.
231 Taxmann 809 · 2015 · High Court
42
citing judgments

An assessment order passed against a transferor company that has ceased to exist due to amalgamation or demerger is non est in the eyes of law and void, as this constitutes a jurisdictional error not curable under Section 292B of the Income-tax Act.

Electrocast Sales India Ltd. v. DCIT
170 ITD 507 · 2018 · ITAT
30
citing judgments

A scheme of amalgamation or demerger approved by the High Court, having considered public interest, cannot be disturbed by the revenue authorities solely on the ground that the assessee is not entitled to certain benefits like those under Section 72A of the Income Tax Act.

8.Ace Multi Axes System Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
367 ITR 266 · 2014 · High Court
26
citing judgments

The eligibility for deductions under sections 80-IB and 80-IA, and related issues like the initial assessment year, demerger, and resulting company status, are significant considerations in the context of company restructuring and tax benefits.

Rustagi Engineering Udyog (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
382 ITR 443 · 2016 · High Court
25
citing judgments

An amalgamation that has been brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer is void ab initio, meaning it is invalid from the beginning.

Dalmia Power Ltd. v. ACIT
420 ITR 339 · 2020 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

Once a scheme of arrangement or amalgamation has been sanctioned by a competent court and due notice has been issued to the income tax department, the binding nature of the scheme cannot be challenged during its implementation, as it attains statutory force.

EID Parry India's v. CIT
23 Taxmann.com 348 · 2012 · High Court
20
citing judgments

Unabsorbed depreciation of an amalgamating company cannot be added to the written down value of assets in the hands of the amalgamated company. The Supreme Court has dismissed a special leave petition against a High Court decision on this point, implicitly upholding this proposition.

Premji Khimraj Shah v. ITO
118 ITR 216 · 1979 · Reported
11
citing judgments

Succession to business requires the successor to take over the whole or substantially the whole of the predecessor's business and continue it. A successor to only a part of the business, resulting from disintegration, is not considered a successor to the original business.

Judgments citing demerger

The Dy CIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. Vodafone West Limited, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1634/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri K.K. VedFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 45Section 47Section 48Section 50D

case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record, are: During the year under consideration, the assessee entered into a Scheme of Demerger, whereby PI assets, being 2932 towers, were transferred to M/s. Vodafone Infrastructure Ltd., without any consideration. The said Scheme of Demerger was approved ... purely business decision based on commercial consideration. On the other hand, the AO is of the view that VDL is camouflaging the demerger scheme and getting it legalized by obtaining sanction from the Hon'ble High Court, which too by misrepresenting facts. In fact the assessee has transferred

M/S Gera Developments Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. PCIT (Central), Pune

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

ITA 1053/PUN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

respectfully submitted that, the 5th proviso to section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act mandates that in the event of the amalgamation or demerger, the amount of depreciation shall not exceed, in any previous year, the depreciation calculated, as if the amalgamation or demerger has not taken place

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kct Papers Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3380/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Dec 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaacit, Circle 5 (1) Vs. M/S. Kct Papers Limited, New Delhi. Thapar House, 124, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aacck4937D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate Shri Deepesh Jain, Advocate Shri Tavish Verma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2025 Date Of Order : 05.12.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Viii, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 21.03.2014For Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Company Belongs To The Thapar Group Established By Late Lala Karam Chand Thapar. There Was A Family Settlement Between The Various Constituents Of The Karam Chand Thapar Family As A Result Of Which Revenue-Organization/Restructuring Of The Group Dated 27Th April, 2001. The Re April, 2001. The Re-Organization Of The Group Companies & Trusts Organization Of The Group Companies & Trusts Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala Was Made Into Four Groups, As Under, Each Headed By The Sons Of Late Lala K.C. Thapar. The Family Tree Of Karam Chand T K.C. Thapar. The Family Tree Of Karam Chand Thapar Family Is Explained As Hapar Family Is Explained As Under In The Form Of A Diagrammatic Chart: Under In The Form Of A Diagrammatic Chart:

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Dan Ratnoo, CIT DR
Section 391

section 2(1B) and 2(19AA) of the act in order to get the benefit of demerger. In this case we observed that there was restructuring of group entities, wherein both amalgamation and demerger. Whether the assessee had followed the due procedure and complied to the conditions specified ... consideration of the demerger, its shares to the shareholders of the demerged company on a proportionate basis except where the resulting company itself is a shareholder of the demerged company; (v) the shareholders holding not less than three-fourths in value of the shares in the demerged company (other than

Agarwal Holdings Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3389/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailshri Girish Agrawalagarwal Holdings Private Ltd. 211, 2Nd Floor Atlanta Arcade, Marol Church Road Marol, Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400059 ............... Appellant Pan: Aauca5094K V/S Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Mumbai-1 ……………… Respondent Room No.330, 3Rd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai Assessee By : Shri Ashok Bansal Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 111ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

appreciating the facts of the case, nature of business of the appellant, the process of formation of the appellant company through the process of demerger and the consistent stand adopted by the predecessor demerged entity which was continuously accepted by the department. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income ... passed u/s 143(3) as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue not appreciating that the appellant is a resultant company in the demerger process and the impugned transactions were already carried out by the demerged company and the appellant had merely carried on the same treatment which

M/S Ujvn Limited, Uttarakhand vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Uttarakhand

ITA 127/DDN/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Assessment Year 2014-15 reported in [2022] 135 taxmann 201 (Delhi Tribunal) allowing the depreciation on the asset received by the assessee on the demerger is not attained finality. 4. It is further seen that following the said order in assessee's own case for Assessment Year ... preceding years, therefore, by respectfully following the said order, we hold that the assessee is eligible for deprecation on the asset on receipt for demerger. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA No.127/DDN/2025

DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Subhash Road vs. Ujvn Limited, Gms Road

ITA 126/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Assessment Year 2014-15 reported in [2022] 135 taxmann 201 (Delhi Tribunal) allowing the depreciation on the asset received by the assessee on the demerger is not attained finality. 4. It is further seen that following the said order in assessee's own case for Assessment Year ... preceding years, therefore, by respectfully following the said order, we hold that the assessee is eligible for deprecation on the asset on receipt for demerger. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA No.127/DDN/2025

Reliance Projects and Property Management Services Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1116/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

books of accounts and not at the written down value (WDV) of the transferred assets of the transferor company immediately before the demerger. An addition of Rs.86.90 crores was made on account excess depreciation in the A.Y. 2017-18. However, no such addition was made in the year under consideration

Reliance Projects and Property Management Services Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT, Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1115/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, CIT-D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69

books of accounts and not at the written down value (WDV) of the transferred assets of the transferor company immediately before the demerger. An addition of Rs.86.90 crores was made on account excess depreciation in the A.Y. 2017-18. However, no such addition was made in the year under consideration

Gbt India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, OSD, Delhi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed as above

ITA 1764/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

appellant assessee and the seller ‘AEIPL’ were related parties and hence, slump sale was chosen as a method of business transfer instead of demerger to overcome the tax burden. Hence, the business transfer between related parties, no goodwill could come into the picture as both parties had the same brand

Sri Hari Prasad Agarwal, Howrah vs. ITO, Ward 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1617/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Nov 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.1617/Kol/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Sri Hari Prasad Agarwal, Vs Ito Ward-46(1), Kolkata Salarpuria Jajodia @ Co.7, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata West Bengal-700072 Pan No. :Adapa 9125 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Fca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 20.05.2025 Passed For Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. The Only Ground Argued By The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee With Regard To Confirmation Of Addition By The Ld. Cit(A) Which Was Made By The Ao U/S.68 Of The Act On Account Of Sale Proceeds Received By The Assessee On Sale Of Shares. 3. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Ay 2015-16 Declaring Total Income Of Rs 4,29,970. The Assessee In Pursuance To Notice U/S.143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act Along With Questionnaire Submitted Required Details & Documents As Sought By The Assessing Officer (Ao). During The Fy 2014-15 The Assessee Sold Quoted

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sima Das Biswas, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 68

Nouveau Multimedia Ltd. in 2007 through Bombay Stock Exchange. It was the submission that in 2009 the said company had issued shares. There was demerger of the said company namely M/s Nouveau Multimedia Ltd. and 6029 shares of M/s Pearl Electronics Ltd. was allotted to assessee ... Nouveau Multimedia Ltd. in pursuance of demerger scheme. It was the submission that the assessee is an investor in shares since 3 1987. The total shares purchased by the assessee in Nouveau Multimedia Ltd. was 13,118 shares. On account of demerger the assessee was allotted 5930 equity shares

Oravel Stays Limited (Formerly Known As Oravel Stays Private Limited), Gurugram vs. DCIT Central Circle 6, New Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 577/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Income tax Act, 1961 ('the Act"). 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in disregarding the scheme of demerger approved by Hon'ble National Company law Tribunal (NCLT) wherein the Indian hotel business was demerged from the Appellant to another entity. 2.1 That ... erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that demerger does not liquidate the company and since the appellant is still an operating company carrying a functional Tax Deduction Account Number the order to be passed in the name of the Appellant even if the undertaking pertaining the alleged

Oravel Stays Limited (Formerly Known As Oravel Stays Private Limited), Gurugram vs. DCIT Circle 76(1), New Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

ITA 452/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40

Income tax Act, 1961 ('the Act"). 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in disregarding the scheme of demerger approved by Hon'ble National Company law Tribunal (NCLT) wherein the Indian hotel business was demerged from the Appellant to another entity. 2.1 That ... erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that demerger does not liquidate the company and since the appellant is still an operating company carrying a functional Tax Deduction Account Number the order to be passed in the name of the Appellant even if the undertaking pertaining the alleged

M/S Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 32/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

stated the facts as under: “3. BFM industries Ltd (A company of SREI group) was holding a piece of land admeasuring 236 Kottah. A demerger exercise took place in 2005 by which the land was transferred to a newly formed company (Estin Tie up Pvt Ltd., assessee co., hereinafter referred ... ETPL). The Calcutta High Court approved the demerger on 18.1.2007. By virtue of demerger, the company acquired the land being 236 kathas at 32, Jagat Banerjee Ghat Road, Ward No. 35, Boro No. 4 Shibpur, Howrah. The land at Howrah was transferred by BFM Industries Ltd. (hereinafter to be called

A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Estin Tie Up Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the two cross appeals filed by the assessee as well as the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 141/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 50C(1)Section 55A

stated the facts as under: “3. BFM industries Ltd (A company of SREI group) was holding a piece of land admeasuring 236 Kottah. A demerger exercise took place in 2005 by which the land was transferred to a newly formed company (Estin Tie up Pvt Ltd., assessee co., hereinafter referred ... ETPL). The Calcutta High Court approved the demerger on 18.1.2007. By virtue of demerger, the company acquired the land being 236 kathas at 32, Jagat Banerjee Ghat Road, Ward No. 35, Boro No. 4 Shibpur, Howrah. The land at Howrah was transferred by BFM Industries Ltd. (hereinafter to be called

Gmm Pfaulder Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr.CIT, Ahmedabad-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 839/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.839/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2020-21 Gmm Pfaulder Ltd. The Pr.Cit बनाम/ 3Rd Floor, B-Jadav Chambers Ahmedabad-1 V/S. Navrangpura H.O. Ahmedabad – 380 015 Ashram Road Ahmedabad – 380 009 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabcg 0563 A (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ahmedabad-1 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Pr. Cit” For Short] Dated 07/03/2025 Passed In Exercise Of His Revisionary Jurisdiction Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short] For Assessment Year (Ay) 2020- 21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Gmm Pfaulder Ltd. Vs. Pcit Asst. Year : 2020-21 2

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 135Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 32Section 80G

taxmann.com 283 (Guj.) / [2025] 477 ITR 392 (Guj.) (dated 28.08.2023), wherein the Court held that where goodwill had arisen on account of demerger of a division and the same represented excess consideration paid for acquisition of business as a going concern, depreciation on such goodwill is allowable under section

Vodafone Idea Ltd. (Earlier Knwon As Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT, . Circle-26(2), New Delhi

In the result, all above said grounds are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8361/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shriyogesh Kumar U.S.Vodafone Idea Ltd Vs. Acit, (Earlier Known As Vodafone Circle-26(2), Mobile Services Ltd) New Delhi 10Th Floor, Birla Centurion, Century Mills Compound, Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Maharastra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb2100P

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K,. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

Brief facts of the case are, the assessee (along with its erstwhile entities except one entity) had filed a demerger scheme Vodafone Idea Ltd ("Demerger Scheme") for transfer of their Passive Infrastructure ('PI') assets to Vodafone Infrastructure Limited (VInfL.') with effect from 01.04.2009. The Demerger Scheme in case ... reported in the stand-alone Balance Sheets of the erstwhile two entities as on 31 March 2011. Accordingly, as a result implementation of the Demerger Scheme, all the transferor entities therein (including erstwhile VSL and VCL) accounted for such transfer of „Pl‟ assets as per the accounting treatment provided

Dy.CIT, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Glaxosmithkline Consumer Pvt. Ltd., Nabha

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 121/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 121/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Dcit, M/S Glaxosmithkline Circle 1(1), बनाम Consumer Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh Patiala Road, Vs. Nabha. Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aafcg8415R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate With Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca (Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Neeraj Jain, Advocate and Ms. Somya Jain, For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 32(1)

case of succession referred to in section 47(xiii)/(xiiib)/(xiv) or section 170 of the Act or in case of amalgamation and demerger, would be apportioned in the ratio of number of days for which the assets were being used by the respective entities and would not exceed ... amount allowable at the prescribed rate, as if the succession or amalgamation or demerger had not taken place. 14. The aforesaid proviso, it will be appreciated, seeks to plug a loophole whereby the two person- entities could claim more than 100% depreciation in the aggregate qua the same asset

Ramsamy Pongianna Gounder Desamani, Pallipalayam vs. Itd, Ward 2, Tiruchengode

ITA 2438/CHNY/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2438/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Late. Ramasamy Pongianna Gounder Desamani, (Represented By Legal Heir Shri. P.D.Balachandhran) 79, R.P.Street, Sankari Bye-Pass Road, R.P.Street,\Pallipalayam – 638 006. [Pan:Acqpd-3208-H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) Ito, Vs. Ward -2, Tiruchengode. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant By प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.09.2025 : 16.10.2025 आदेश /Order Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, [Herein After “Ld. Cit(A)] Dated 16.07.2024 & Pertains To Assessment Year 2011-12. :-2-:

For Respondent: Shri. T. S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 2(22)(e)Section 250

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, 'बी' न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, CHENNAI श्री एस एस विश्वनेत्र रवि

DCIT, Range-3, Lucknow vs. M/S. Prayagraj Power Generation Company Ltd., Noida

In the result, ground no. 1 of appeal is dismissed and ground no

ITA 393/LKW/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115J

amounts or aggregate of the amounts debited to the statement of profit and loss on distribution of non-cash assets to shareholders in a demerger in accordance with Appendix A of the Indian Accounting Standards 10; (d) decreased by all amounts or aggregate of the amounts credited to the statement ... profit and loss on distribution of non-cash assets to shareholders in a demerger in accordance with Appendix A of the Indian Accounting Standards 10: Provided that nothing contained in clause (a) or clause (b) shall apply to the amount credited or debited to other comprehensive income under the head

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 5658/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Respondent: Shri Nimesh Vora, Ld. Adv
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

Coming to ground No.1, which pertains to the depreciation on “non-compete fee” we observe from the assessment order that in the scheme of demerger, intangible asset by name of non-compete fee @ Written Down Value (WDV) of Rs. 329,76,56,250/- was distributed among ETPL, PTVPL and PTPL ... claim of depreciation for the assessee-company with regard to the Film Software Library is reworked as under: 10. 1. In the scheme of demerger, M/s.Prism TV Private Limited has acquired intangible asset by name Film Software Library whose WDV was recorded