High Court upholds ITAT decision on depreciation dispute, citing precedent and lack of substantial legal question.

The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal regarding the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill. The Court noted that a similar issue had been decided against the Revenue by the Division Bench for the Assessment Year 2011-12. As appeals for earlier years were pending before the Supreme Court, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the present appeal and upheld the decision of the ITAT in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance of depreciation on goodwill claimed by the assessee.
2. Upholding the decision of CIT(A) by the ITAT in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill.
3. Appeal by the Revenue against the decision of the ITAT.

Analysis:
1. The assessee claimed depreciation on goodwill in the revised Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation on goodwill claimed by the assessee. The assessee then appealed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who allowed the appeal, leading to the disallowance being deleted.

2. The Revenue, dissatisfied with the decision of the CIT(A), approached the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT, considering its earlier decisions for Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12, upheld the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill. The Revenue, feeling aggrieved by the ITAT's decision, preferred the present appeal before the High Court.

3. During the hearing of the present appeal, the advocate for the Revenue acknowledged that a similar appeal for the Assessment Year 2011-12 had been dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The advocate further mentioned that appeals for earlier assessment years were pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court noted that the issue was concluded against the Revenue based on the decision of the Division Bench for the Assessment Year 2011-12. Consequently, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the present appeal and dismissed it accordingly.

---