Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
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 4817 
Join Channel 
