Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
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.