Business deductions and transfer pricing issues: tribunal treatment of software write-offs, donation receipts, warranty provisions, and related expens...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2921 to 2940 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on the intangible asset described as "Right to Collect Toll" under s.32. The Tribunal found that, under the DBFOT contract, the assessee has deemed ownership, acquisition and possession of the underlying project assets, which suffices to satisfy the ownership requirement for depreciation, even though the asset is intangible and cannot be "physically owned" in the manner envisaged by the AO. ITAT distinguished BOT projects relied upon by the Revenue, noting the wider scope of DBFOT and the deemed acquisition of the project by the assessee. The assessee's choice of depreciation instead of amortization was upheld. Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
ITAT held that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on the intangible asset described as "Right to Collect Toll" under s.32. The Tribunal found that, under the DBFOT contract, the assessee has deemed ownership, acquisition and possession of the underlying project assets, which suffices to satisfy the ownership requirement for depreciation, even though the asset is intangible and cannot be "physically owned" in the manner envisaged by the AO. ITAT distinguished BOT projects relied upon by the Revenue, noting the wider scope of DBFOT and the deemed acquisition of the project by the assessee. The assessee's choice of depreciation instead of amortization was upheld. Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
