Revenue's Appeal Partially Allowed: Non-compete Fee Not an Intangible Asset

The Tribunal partly allowed the Revenue's appeal, dismissing the disallowance under Section 14A of the IT Act as there was no exempt income. The decision against treating the non-compete fee as an intangible asset for depreciation was upheld, as it did not qualify as such based on relevant case law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the IT Act r.w. rule 8D.
2. Treatment of non-compete fee as an intangible asset for depreciation.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 14A of the IT Act r.w. rule 8D:
The appeal was filed against the order passed by CIT(A)-3, Delhi for the assessment year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer disallowed amounts for non-deduction of TDS on non-compete fee, excess depreciation claim, and under Section 14A of the Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. DR contended that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance under Section 14A. However, the Ld. AR argued that there was no exempt income earned by the assessee, hence no disallowance was warranted. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating there was no need to interfere as there was no exempt income, thus dismissing Ground No. 1 of the appeal.

Issue 2: Treatment of non-compete fee as an intangible asset for depreciation:
Regarding Ground No. 2, the dispute centered on whether non-compete fee should be treated as an intangible asset for depreciation. The CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on the non-compete fee, which was part of the sale consideration for acquiring a hospital group. The Ld. DR argued against this direction, citing a Delhi High Court decision. The Ld. AR, however, relied on various case laws to support the depreciation claim. The Tribunal analyzed the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in Sharp Business System, which clarified that a non-compete fee does not confer exclusive rights over primary business activities and cannot be considered an intangible asset. The Tribunal, thus, allowed Ground No. 2 of the revenue's appeal, holding that the non-compete fee did not qualify for depreciation as an intangible asset.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the Revenue, dismissing the disallowance under Section 14A while allowing the decision against treating the non-compete fee as an intangible asset for depreciation.

---