Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The ITAT upheld the allowability of depreciation on goodwill arising from a court-sanctioned amalgamation under section 32(1)(ii), rejecting the AO's disallowance and reliance on AS-26 and precedent. The tribunal affirmed that once depreciation is allowed, the carry-forward of unabsorbed depreciation is a vested right and cannot be denied without reversal by a competent forum, thereby dismissing the AO's disallowance of brought-forward depreciation. Product registration expenses were held to be revenue in nature and deductible under section 37(1), not capital expenditure. The claim for deduction under section 80-IC was sustained, as the Baddi Unit was found to have operational autonomy and no nexus was established to allocate corporate expenses to it. Scrap income was deemed eligible for deduction under section 80-IC, consistent with prior assessments. Finally, the enhanced income due to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was held eligible for deduction under section 80-IC. All revenue appeals were dismissed.
The ITAT upheld the allowability of depreciation on goodwill arising from a court-sanctioned amalgamation under section 32(1)(ii), rejecting the AO's disallowance and reliance on AS-26 and precedent. The tribunal affirmed that once depreciation is allowed, the carry-forward of unabsorbed depreciation is a vested right and cannot be denied without reversal by a competent forum, thereby dismissing the AO's disallowance of brought-forward depreciation. Product registration expenses were held to be revenue in nature and deductible under section 37(1), not capital expenditure. The claim for deduction under section 80-IC was sustained, as the Baddi Unit was found to have operational autonomy and no nexus was established to allocate corporate expenses to it. Scrap income was deemed eligible for deduction under section 80-IC, consistent with prior assessments. Finally, the enhanced income due to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was held eligible for deduction under section 80-IC. All revenue appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.