Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2011 (4) TMI 1177 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal allows depreciation on intangible assets, rejects goodwill argument The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing depreciation on Technical Proprietary Information and Pre-qualification Rights, rejecting the ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal allows depreciation on intangible assets, rejects goodwill argument

                            The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, allowing depreciation on Technical Proprietary Information and Pre-qualification Rights, rejecting the Revenue's argument that these assets constituted 'goodwill'. The Tribunal found the business valuation report by M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. valid and concluded that the transaction was genuine, not a paper maneuver. Consequently, all Revenue appeals were dismissed.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Depreciation on intangible assets (Technical Proprietary Information and Pre-qualification Rights).
                            2. Characterization of intangible assets as 'goodwill'.
                            3. Validity of business valuation report by M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd.
                            4. Nature of the transaction (genuine commercial transaction vs. paper transaction).

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Depreciation on Intangible Assets:
                            The assessee-company, M/s. Best & Crompton Engineering Projects Ltd., claimed depreciation on two intangible assets, namely Technical Proprietary Information and Pre-qualification Rights, at the rate of 25% under section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act for assessment years 2002-03 to 2005-06. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim, reasoning that the intangible assets would partake the character of 'goodwill', which is not eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(A) reversed this decision, allowing the depreciation claim, and the Revenue appealed against this order.

                            2. Characterization of Intangible Assets as 'Goodwill':
                            The Assessing Officer treated the consideration amounts as having been paid for 'goodwill' rather than for intangible assets. The assessee contended that the transfer of business was based on a business-valuation-report by M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd., which valued the pre-qualification rights and technical proprietary information separately. The assessee argued that pre-qualification rights and technical proprietary information are commercial rights and not 'goodwill'. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, stating that pre-qualification rights and technical proprietary information should be treated as 'intangible assets' and not 'goodwill'.

                            3. Validity of Business Valuation Report:
                            The Assessing Officer questioned the basis of the valuation report by M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd., suggesting that the transaction was merely a financial maneuver to avail depreciation benefits. The Tribunal, however, held that the valuation report by a reputed Chartered Accountant firm could not be lightly dismissed. The Tribunal noted that the valuation method adopted was one of the recognized methods for business valuation and that the report extensively dealt with the issues to arrive at the business valuation.

                            4. Nature of the Transaction:
                            The Revenue argued that the transaction was a paper transaction intended to avail depreciation benefits. The Tribunal found that the transfer of pre-qualification rights and technical proprietary information was done at arm's length, based on a business valuation report, and was necessary for the assessee to carry on its business and secure further business. The Tribunal concluded that the transaction was genuine and not a sham.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, allowing the depreciation on pre-qualification rights and technical proprietary information. The Tribunal found that these intangible assets were not 'goodwill' and that the valuation report by M/s. Ernst & Young Pvt. Ltd. was valid. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, confirming that the transaction was genuine and based on commercial considerations.

                            Result:
                            All the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found