“Section 32(1)(ii)”

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, THANE, WAGLE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THANE WEST vs. M M PLASTOWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, THANE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17 Deputy Commissioner Of M M Plastoware India Private Income Tax, Circle-1, Thane Limited Gala No. 10-15, Arihant Darshan, Vs. 90 Feet Road, Bhayander West, Thane – 101101. (Pan: Aahcm2568D) (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 120/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M M Plastoware India Private Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited Tax, Circle-1, Thane Gala No. 10-15, Arihant Darshan, 90 Feet Road, Vs. Bhayander West, Thane – 101101. (Pan: Aahcm2568D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Lalit Munoyat, Ca Revenue : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal:

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K(SMC)” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(2)(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CHURCHGATE vs. MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED, MUMBAI

civil structures forming\npart of the building and not functional tools of trade, and\nthereby allowing higher depreciation contrary to Explanation 1\nto section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?\n8.\nWhether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the\ncase ... capital outlay which ought\nto be amortised over the concession period and cannot be treated as\nan intangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of\nthe Act. The DR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed\nthe claim of the assessee merely by following

MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand V Mahadeokara.Y:2014-15 Mumbai International Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Airport Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – Chhatrpati Shivaji 400020. International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) A.Y:2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Vs. Mumbai International Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Airport Ltd., New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, 400020. Chhatrpati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Saurabha Soparkar Virtually Appeared Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand V Mahadeokar, Am: These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Under Section 250 Of The Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai Income-Tax Act, 1961 Dated 05.08.2025 In The Case Of The Assessee For Assessment Year 2014–15. The Assessment In The Present Case Was Originally Completed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2017. Since The Issues Involved In The Appeals Of The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Arise Out Of The Same Appellate Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

civil structures forming part of the building and not functional tools of trade, and thereby allowing higher depreciation contrary to Explanation 1 to section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 8. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case ... capital outlay which ought to be amortised over the concession period and cannot be treated as an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The DR further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the claim of the assessee merely by following

TRENT LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

issues examined by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order relates to the claim of depreciation on goodwill under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. During the year under consideration, the assessee acquired the 'value fashion' business segment from its group company, namely Trent Hypermarket Private Limited, with effect ... result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 2(11)", "Section 2(42C)", "Section 32(1)", "Section 115JB", "Section 143(3)", "Section 144B", "Section 270A", "Section 32(1)(ii)" ], "issues": "Whether the excess consideration paid for a slump sale, representing goodwill, is eligible for depreciation under Section 32 of the Income

KOVALAM RESORT PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6580/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) 2. Ita No. 6578/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. Ita No. 6579/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Kovalam Resort Private Dcit 2(1)(1), Limited 561, Aayakar The Leela, Sahar, Andheri Vs. Bhavan, M. K. East, Mumbai-400 059 Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaeck4804H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharan Gandi & Shri Ravi Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2026

tangible assets necessarily represents goodwill or commercial rights. It was argued that such goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 302. 31. In support ... crores. It was contended that in either situation, the existence of goodwill stands established and depreciation thereon is allowable in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 33. The learned AR further submitted that, even assuming without admitting that the fifth proviso to section 32(1) is applicable

KOVALAM RESORT PRIVATE LIMTIED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6580/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) 2. Ita No. 6578/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) & 3. Ita No. 6579/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Kovalam Resort Private Dcit 2(1)(1), Limited 561, Aayakar The Leela, Sahar, Andheri Vs. Bhavan, M. K. East, Mumbai-400 059 Road, Mumbai- 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaeck4804H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharan Gandi & Shri Ravi Gupta, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Ritesh Misra, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 30.01.2026

tangible assets necessarily represents goodwill or commercial rights. It was argued that such goodwill is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 302. 31. In support ... crores. It was contended that in either situation, the existence of goodwill stands established and depreciation thereon is allowable in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 33. The learned AR further submitted that, even assuming without admitting that the fifth proviso to section 32(1) is applicable

KOVALAM RESORT PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

tangible assets necessarily represents goodwill or\ncommercial rights. It was argued that such goodwill is an\nintangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of\nthe Act, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smifs Securities\nLtd. [2012] 348 ITR 302.\n31. In support ... crores. It was contended that in\neither situation, the existence of goodwill stands established and\ndepreciation thereon is allowable in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of\nthe Act.\n33. The learned AR further submitted that, even assuming\nwithout admitting that the fifth proviso to section 32(1) is\napplicable

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. LIGHTHOUSE LEARNING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

valuation of goodwill and allowability of depreciation on goodwill in the light of Explanation 7 to Section 43(1) and 6th proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act were never discussed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case? 3. Whether on the facts ... accordingly depreciation on goodwill arising out of amalgamation should have been NIL in the light of the 6th proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that

ANSHUL SPECIALTY MOLECULES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokaranshul Speciality Dcit Circle Molecules Private 1(1)(1), Mumbai Limited Vs. Aayakar Bhawani, Flexcel Park, „C‟ Wing, S.V. Mumbai-400 020 Road, Nr. 24 Karat Multiplex, Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai- 400102 Pan/Gir No. Aabca4003H (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri H. N. Motiwala, Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 22.01.2026

over the value of assets and liabilities taken over. The assessee claimed depreciation at 12.5%, amounting to Rs. 1,22,44,409/-, under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Assessing Officer examined the claim of depreciation on goodwill and issued notices under section 142(1) calling upon ... Supreme Court in Smifs Securities Ltd., wherein goodwill was held to be an intangible asset eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii). 7. The learned CIT(A), however, did not accept the contentions of the assessee. The CIT(A) held that the goodwill