Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        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

        <h1>Assessee's Appeal Granted: Depreciation & Non-Compete Fees Remanded for Fresh Consideration</h1> <h3>M/s. Incap Contract Manufacturing Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11 (4), Bangalore.</h3> M/s. Incap Contract Manufacturing Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 11 (4), Bangalore. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of depreciation on customer relationship rights (non-compete fees).2. Eligibility of customer relationship rights as intangible assets under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Consideration of customer relationship rights as goodwill.4. Claim of depreciation on goodwill.5. Additional grounds regarding revenue expenditure and depreciation on goodwill.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Depreciation on Customer Relationship Rights (Non-Compete Fees):The assessee claimed depreciation on customer relationship rights, which were part of a business transfer agreement with TVS Electronics Ltd. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed this claim, stating that customer relationship rights do not fall under the expression of similar nature used in Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The AO applied the Doctrine of ejusdem generis and held that customer relationship rights cannot be considered as business or commercial rights similar to patents, copyrights, trademarks, and franchises. Consequently, the AO treated the payment as goodwill, which is not eligible for depreciation, and brought the amount to tax for the assessment years under consideration.2. Eligibility of Customer Relationship Rights as Intangible Assets Under Section 32(1)(ii):The assessee argued that customer relationship rights should be included under the expression 'any other business or commercial right of similar nature' as per Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's disallowance, relying on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in Sharp Business System Vs. CIT. The assessee contended that the jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Ingersoll Rand International India Ltd. had decided in favor of the assessee on similar issues, making the customer relationship rights eligible for depreciation.3. Consideration of Customer Relationship Rights as Goodwill:The AO considered customer relationship rights as goodwill, a view supported by the assessee's submission that these rights are almost in the nature of goodwill. The AO's decision was based on the similarity between customer relationship rights and goodwill, leading to the denial of depreciation on the grounds that goodwill is not eligible for depreciation. The CIT(A) upheld this view.4. Claim of Depreciation on Goodwill:The assessee did not initially claim depreciation on goodwill in its return of income or before the CIT(A). However, the assessee later raised this issue, citing the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in CIT Vs. Smifs Securities Ltd., which held that goodwill is eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Tribunal admitted this additional ground, noting that the issue is legal and does not require further factual investigation. The Tribunal set aside this issue to the AO for a fresh decision as per law.5. Additional Grounds Regarding Revenue Expenditure and Depreciation on Goodwill:The assessee raised additional grounds, arguing that if depreciation on non-compete fees is not allowed, the fees should be considered as revenue expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The assessee also contended that depreciation on goodwill should be allowed as per Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The Tribunal admitted these additional grounds and remanded the issues to the AO for reconsideration.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issues of depreciation on goodwill and the treatment of non-compete fees to the AO for fresh consideration. The Tribunal emphasized the need to follow the jurisdictional High Court's judgment and the Hon'ble Supreme Court's ruling on the eligibility of goodwill for depreciation. The Tribunal's decision ensures that the AO re-examines the claims in light of the relevant legal precedents.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found