https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784840 Issue concerns allowable depreciation on capitalised software classified as an intangible asset. The article explains that a revenue authority's restriction of depreciation to 25% for allegedly bespoke in-house software was reversed by reliance on a line of judicial precedents recognising computer software as an intangible asset eligible for higher depreciation rates. The precedent trajectory, including higher court authority, supports allowance of depreciation at 60% for such software; consequence: the higher depreciation claim is sustained and the lower 25% restriction rejected. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jan 2026 08:29:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784840 Issue concerns allowable depreciation on capitalised software classified as an intangible asset. The article explains that a revenue authority's restriction of depreciation to 25% for allegedly bespoke in-house software was reversed by reliance on a line of judicial precedents recognising computer software as an intangible asset eligible for higher depreciation rates. The precedent trajectory, including higher court authority, supports allowance of depreciation at 60% for such software; consequence: the higher depreciation claim is sustained and the lower 25% restriction rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784840