2015 (7) TMI 690

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the assessment year 2006-07. The petition is also directed against the order dated 21.11.2013, whereby the objections raised by the petitioner were disposed of by the Assessing Officer. 2. The original assessment was completed under Section 143 (3) read with Section 144C(13) of the said Act on 28.10.2010. The point in issue is with regard to Software Licence Fee. According to the petitioner it had claimed the same as revenue expenditure, but in the assessment order, only a part of the Software Licence Fee was allowed as revenue expenditure and an amount of Rs. 25.36 crores was capitalized and depreciation was allowed thereon at the rate of 60%. The petitioner was aggrieved by the fact that the said expenditure was capitalized to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ses, franchisee or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature are intangible assets and depreciation at the rate of 25% is allowable on these intangible assets. 6. Hence your company has wrongly claimed and allowed the depreciation on expenses incurred on Software License fee @ 60% being computer in nature. However, as discussed above the expenses claimed as Software License fee is in nature of Intangible assets. Therefore depreciation allowable is 25% on the above expenses instead of 60% allowed earlier. 7. On the above facts and circumstances your case was re-opened u/s 147/ 148 and the undersigned intends to allow depreciation @ 25% instead of 60% allowed earlier." 4. The petitioner filed its objections on 15.11.2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t for removing the bar against taking action after the said four year period remains unfulfilled. In our recent decision in Wel Intertrade Private Ltd.[2009] 308 ITR 22 (Delhi) we had agreed with the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Duli Chand Singhania [2004] 269 ITR 192 that, in the absence of an allegation in the reasons recorded that the escapement of income had occurred by reason of failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, any action taken by the Assessing officer under Section 147 beyond the four year period would be wholly without jurisdiction. Reiterating our view-point, we hold that the notice dated 29.03.2004 under Section 148 bas....