AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e following grounds: 1) "The ld CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 18,11,46,000/- made in respect of depreciation on intangible assets namely Design and Technical knowhow, vendor & customer net work relationships. 2) a. The Ld CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance made in respect of depreciation amounting to Rs. 117.31 Millions on amount of goodwill of Rs. 469 Millions, which was neither claimed in the Return of Income, nor during the course of assessment proceedings. 2) b. The Ld. CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in set-aside the matter & directing the Assessing Officer to examine the matter regarding claim of depreciation on Goodwill, which is not permitted under provision of Section 251(1)(a) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 01/10/1998. 3) The Ld CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,21,74,000/- made on account of provision of obsolete inventory without basis of such valuation. 4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad ought to have u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trial activity. It has acquired the wholesale business of AFL without acquiring the factory. As such the activity of AFL is of stitching of the textiles which were manufactured by a group concern of the assessee mainly Arvind Mills Ltd. Therefore the case of the assessee does not fall under the Explanation-4 to Section 32 of the income tax Act. As per the AO, know-how is industrial information or technique likely to assist in the manufacturing or processing of goods. As the assessee is not engaged in any manufacturing activity, therefore, it is not entitled to depreciation as claimed by it on the design and technical know-how. It is a fact on record that the factory of AFL was not transferred to the assessee. As such, AFL under the agreement with the assessee was under obligation to act as a job worker on behalf of the assessee. Therefore the AO was of the view that there was no transfer of any design and technical knowhow to the assessee for which there was no need to make any payment to AFL. It was also agreed between the assessee and AFL that in case there is underutilization of the capacity of the assessee then AFL would be free to undertake the activity of garment productio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of people representing some specific activity. iii. The assessee is getting the garments manufactured not only from the factory owned by AFL, but it is also getting the work done from the outsiders on a job work basis. These outsiders perform the work and carrying out the activity as per the designs and technical know-how of the assessee. Thus it is clear that the technical know-how acquired by the assessee was being used by it. Had these not been acquired by it from AFL then it would not have been getting the job done from the outside parties. The assessee in support of its claim also filed the list of the job workers. iv. The assessee has acquired the business activity of AFL after making the agreed payment. The payment to AFL was not limited to the business activities, but it also covered the intangible assets acquired by the assessee. Thus the assessee is entitled to depreciation on the cost incurred by it on the purchase of intangible assets along with the business assets acquired from AFL. v. As regards the vendor network relationship, the assessee submitted that it was paid to AFL for utilizing the network which was build up by AFL over a period of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d all these networks created by AFL. 3.1 In view of the above the assessee claimed that it is eligible for the depreciation under section 32 of the Act in respect of intangible assets. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: "In view of facts mentioned above, I am of the opinion that the A.O. wasnot justified in holding that term "any other business or commercial rights ofsimilar nature" used in section 32 should be having same meaning of earlierwords viz knowhow, patents, copy rights, trade mark, licences and franchises. The appellant has correctly referred to various decisions which held that the appellant was entitled to depreciation on the assets skill and knowhow, business f information, trading reputation, marketing and distribution, territorial knowhow. Such decisions have held that any right which is obtained for carrying on business effectively is likely to fall within the meaning of intangible assets. It is brought to my notice that Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sarabhai Animal Health Ltd. has held that marketing rights acquired by the company were intangible right eligibl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with manufacturing units of 'B' Ltd. which could affect operations of projects division, 'B' Ltd. transferred its electrical and project contracting division along with its fixed assets, current assets and current liabilities to assessee - Said transfer took place on basis of business valuation report obtained from a Chartered accountant firm, according to which business of Electrical & Projects contracting Division was valued , at Rs. 34.85 crores - Said business value of Rs. 34.85 crores was fixed as I purchase consideration for transfer of Electrical Projects and Contracting f Division - Project consideration included cost of technical proprietary information and value of commercial/pre-qualification right - Assessee claimed depreciation on two items of intangible assets, viz., technical proprietary information and pre-qualification rights under section 32(l)(ii) Assessing Officer disallowed said claim on ground that those intangible assets would partake character of goodwill which was not eligible for depreciation under section 32(1 )(ii) - Assessing Officer also held that entire transaction was paper transactions in order to avail benefit of depreciation - Howe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l rights" cannot be restricted to only the aforesaid six categories of assets, viz., knowhow, patents, trademarks, copyrights, licenses or franchises. The nature of "business or commercial rights" can be of the same genus in which all the aforesaid six assets fall. All the above fall in the genus of intangible assetsthat form part of the tool of trade of an assessee facilitating smooth carrying on of the business. In the circumstances, it is observed that in case of the assessee, intangible assets, viz. claims; business information; business records; contracts; employees; and knowhow, are all assets, which are invaluable and result in carrying on the transmission and distribution business by the assessee, which was hitherto being carried out by the transferor, without any interruption. The aforesaid intangible assets are, therefore, comparable to a license to carry out the existing transmission and distribution business of the transferor. In the absence of the aforesaid intangible assets, the assessee would have had to commence business from scratch and go through the gestation period whereas by acquiring the aforesaid business rights along with the tangible assets, the assessee go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - Allowance /Rate of - Whether stock exchange membership card is an asset eligible for depreciation under section 32 - Held, yes [Para 1] [In favour of assessee]" In the case of RFCL the Chandigadh ITAT has while allowing claim for depreciation on intangible considered the following and accepted the claim of assessee: "ITAT observed that "The perusal of the schedules to BPA comprising of the above said list of Stockiest Agreements, Distribution Agreements, Lease Agreements and also Distribution and Marketing Agreements, alongwith list of licenses and Permissions and List of various products, the name license and also the manufacturing know-how etc., along with list of employees are assets, Which are invaluable and instrumental in carrying on the business of Animal Health Care and Diagnostics Business Divisions acquired by the assessee from M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. as per the BPA. The acquisition of the above said items is a bundle of rights acquired by the assessee for which a lump sum price was fixed and no break up in the value of price was determined either by the assessee or by the auditors but the same constituted bundle o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... there was no valuation done by the assessee in respect of intangible assets. The ld. DR vehemently supported the order of the AO. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. From the preceding discussion, we note that the AO while making the disallowance of the depreciation claimed by the assessee on the intangible assets as discussed above has referred to the comment given by the statutory auditor of the company. The statutory auditor of the company has commented on the allowability of the depreciation claim made by the assessee in respect of intangible assets. Accordingly, the AO has referred in his assessment order regarding the comment given by the statutory auditor of the company. However on perusal of the comment of the statutory auditor of the company we find that claim of the assessee has not been denied for the depreciation on the intangible assets. The auditor has mentioned that they are unable to comment on the claim of the assessee on the depreciation of intangible assets. The expression used by the statutory auditor of the company cannot be construed as if the depreciation claimed by the assessee was denied. The comment of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with reference to the fact that assessee has undertaken on-site work in USA and the receipts and payments are in USA. Since assessee is an Indian company , the net of the amounts after considering the expenditure was remitted to India and was incorporated in the books of accounts. Just because the expenditure was debited to the P & L account in the books of accounts in India, the amounts cannot be considered as payments made from India. It is a fact that amounts are paid abroad and the services are rendered abroad. Those companies who received the amounts have no permanent establishment in India or even the business connection in India. Therefore, the payments made to them abroad can not be brought to tax in India as the jurisdiction of IT Act extends only to territory of India where the payments have been made from India (sic), then it can be verified whether amounts can be brought to tax as per the provisions of I.T Act or whether Double T axation A voidance Agreement (DT AA) can be invoked so as to claim benefit. However, since the amounts are paid outside India to persons outside Indian territory , who does not have any tax liability as far as I.T . Act, 1961 is concerned, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets acquired on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, owned , wholly or partly, by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession." 8.5 Similarly it is also important to refer to the Explanation-4 of Section 32 of the Act which reads as under: "Explanation 4:- For the purposes of this sub-section, the expression "knowhow" means any industrial information or technique likely to assist in the manufacture or processing of goods or in the working of a mine, oil-well or other sources of mineral deposits (including searching for discovery or testing of deposits for the winning of access thereto)." 8.6 We note that depreciation on the intangible assets was brought under the statute by the Finance Act 1998 for the purposes as mentioned under: "Depreciation to be allowed on intangible assets under the existing provisions, depreciation is allowable when building, plant, machinery or furniture is used by the assessee for the purposes of his business or profession. It is proposed to widen the scope of this section so as to provide that depreciation will a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the AO was of the view that the assessee is not eligible for the depreciation on the technical know-how as discussed above. 8.10 However we disagree with the contentions of the AO on the ground that the use of technical know-how is not limited to any industrial undertaking. As such the use of technical know-how is also available even to the business activities where there was no manufacturing activity. In our considered view the AO has taken a narrow meaning of the technical knowhow on the basis of explanation 4 to section 32 of the Act. 8.11 The purpose for the depreciation on the intangible assets has been explained in the memorandum of the finance Act to 1998, and there was no such limitation provided for the allowability of the depreciation on technical know-how. Therefore we are not inclined to uphold the finding of the AO that the depreciation on the technical know-how is available only in relation to the industrial undertaking. 9. The 2nd question framed by the AO was that whether the assessee has acquired any design and technical know-how from AFL. In this regard, we find that the assessee claimed to have acquired designs and technical know-how from AFL as det....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the market beyond the particular point of time. As such we are of the view that there cannot be any fixed pattern of any design for any particular class of the people. Accordingly, we are not impressed with the finding of the AO that there was no design and technical know-how acquired by the assessee. 10. The 3rd question framed by the AO was that whether the assessee has used technical know-how acquired from AFL. In this regard, we find that the assessee has acquired the factory of AFL on contract wherein it was agreed that the AFL should give priority to the work of the assessee assigned to it which will be executed under its supervision. The relevant clauses of the agreement are reproduced as under: AGREEMENT TO MANUFACTURE PRODUCTS This Agreement is entered into on the 1st day of September, 2006 By and Between 1. Arvind Fashions Limited, a company incorporated under the laws of India having its registered office at The Arvind Mills Naroda Road, Railwaypura Post Ahmedabad 380 025 India hereinafter referred sto as "AFL'' (which term means and includes its successors and assigns) and 2. VF Arvind Brands Pvt. Ltd. a company incorporated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3 years unless terminated in writing by either party as provided for herein 3. Appointment for manufacturing Products VFABPL hereby appoints AFL for manufacturing Products as per the Orders from the Factory, such appointment shall be from the effective Date for the entire term of this agreement for the consideration stipulated below. 4. Orders VFABPL shall periodically release Orders in favour of AFL stipulating therein the Products to be manufactured, rate and delivery schedule which when accepted by AFL shall be duly executed by AFL. 5. Obligations of AFL 5.1 AFL shall ensure the Factory is in good working condition at all times and that it complies with the VF Terms of Engagement a copy of which has been made available to and signed by AFL. 5.2 AFL shall make every effort to ensure that the Products manufactured are of the quality required by VFABPL. Further, AFL shall deliver all orders to such place as notified/ communicated by VFABPL to AFL. 5.3 AFL shall give first priority to Orders received from VFABPL and shall take on orders from third parties subject to the same. 5.4 AFL shall provide all ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Kolor Kraft 1,423,522 1% 16. Max Colors 1,394,196 1% 17. Dhatri Kreations 1,364,366 1% 18. Megha Garments Pvt. Ltd. 1,319,743 1% 19. Sreeram and Sons 1,176,460 1% 20. Other small Job workers - around 70 nos. 16,996,882 8% Grand Total 216,359,196 • Vendor and customer relationship 10.3 In this regard we note that the assessee has acquired a lot of vendors and customers which were generated by AFL over a long period of time. However, the assessee has acquired such relationship with the vendor and customer of AFL instantly on the acquisition of the business of AFL. Accordingly, the assessee has paid a certain sum of money to AFL for the acquisition of such relationships. We find important to refer the details of the vendor and customer relationship acquired by the assessee which are reproduced under: "6.2 Vendor relationships Vendor relationships refer to the relationship with the existing set of v valuation. The key vendors considered for the purpose of valuation are. 6.2.1 Job Workers network I Job workers network is an integral component o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uct or commodity suppliers not exclusive to AFL, abundantly available in the market and have low switching cost. 6.2.6 Other vendors' viz. Capital goods, traded goods & others are not considered as they can be easily established and are not specific to the business. 6.3 Customer contracts and relationships Customer contracts refer to the sales contract with the existing customers as on date of valuation and customer relationships refer to the expected revenue stream generation from the existing customers that are not contracted. The key customer relationships considered for valuation are: 6.3.1 Multi-Brand Outlet (MBO): MBO's are third party owned outlets and forms a major part of the retail segment in the unorganized market. It showcases sales products of different brands. MBO's are one of the main channels of sales of VFABL because of their presence on hi-street. For the year 2005-06, MBO's contributed 26% of the total sales to AFL. The sales transactions *with MBO's were carried out directly by VFABPL until recently, when the company decided to transact through die distributors. Today VFABPL has 18 distributors who....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation, it is revealed that the tangible assets were transferred for a net value of Rs. 28.11 Crores. (v) The excess amount of Rs. 16,58,76,000/- was claimed as payment made by the assessee Company for acquisition of various business and commercial rights categorized under the separate head, namely, "goodwill" in the books of account of the assessee. These business and commercial rights comprised of the following: Business claims; business information; business records; contracts; skilled employees; knowhow. (vi) The assessee Company while filing its return for the relevant assessment year 2005-06 claimed depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act with respect to the aforesaid amount of Rs. 16,58,76,000/- as being a price paid for acquisition of above mentioned intangible assets. (vii) The Assessing Officer(AO) while completing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act disallowed the depreciation on 'goodwill' as claimed in the return vide order dated 28th December, 2007. The AO disallowed the claim of the assessee Company on two grounds, namely, (a) depreciation under Section 32(2)(ii) is not available on goodwill; (b) the assessee Company was un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the seller for sale in India. It is further observed that the AO was not correct in holding that payment was made for acquisition of 'goodwill'. Payment had, in fact, been made for acquisition of commercial rights on which depreciation is permissible. In the circumstances, these appeals are dismissed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue." 10.5 We also find support from the order of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Arvind Brands Ltd. in ITA No. 3080/Ahd/2010 wherein it was held as under: "6. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the records. Before us, the learned AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions as were made before the authorities below and strongly supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A). The learned DR, on the other hand, ITA No.3080/Ahd/2010 ITO vs. Arvind Brands Ltd. Asst.Year - 2005- 06 supported the impugned order of the Assessing Officer. The moot question that is to be decided whether the depreciation claimed on the intangible assets amounting to Rs. 12,03,12,500 which relates to these two assets in the names of Brand name "Arvind" and "Marketing and distribution Network is allowable u/s.3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the entire period. 18. What follows from the above is that normally the ordinary rule is to be applied, namely, revenue expenditure incurred in a particular year is to be allowed in that year. Thus, if the assessee claims that expenditure in that year, the IT Department cannot deny the same. However, in those cases where the assessee himself wants to spread the expenditure over a period of ensuing years, it can be allowed only if the principle of 'Matching Concept' is satisfied, which upto now has been restricted to the cases of debentures. 19. In the instant case, as noticed above, the assessee did not want spread over of this expenditure over a period of five years as in the return filed by it, it had claimed the entire interest paid upfront as deductible expenditure in the same year. In such a situation, when this course of action was permissible in law to the assessee as it was in consonance with the provisions of the Act which permit the assessee to claim the expenditure in the year in which it was incurred, merely because a different treatment was given in the books of account cannot be a factor which would deprive the assessee from claiming the ent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the agreements between the assessee and AFL which are placed on pages 196 to 202 of the paper book. 11.1 Similarly there is a valuation report allocating the purchase consideration paid by the assessee to AFL which has not been disputed by the AO. The copy of the valuation report is placed on pages 159 to 194 of the paper book. 12. The next question arises about the allowability of the cost incurred by the assessee in connection with the business. In our view, such deductions cannot be disallowed on a technical basis. Supposing the assessee does not allocate the expenses under the head design and technical know-how and it prefers to allocate the same under the head goodwill. There is no dispute for the depreciation on the goodwill as held by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of semifs securities Ltd. reported in 348 ITR 302 wherein it was held as under: 4. Explanation 3 states that the expression 'asset' shall mean an intangible asset, being know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature. A reading the words 'any other business or commercial rights of similar nature'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee under the provisions of the Act. 12.2 We also note that the assessee has claimed depreciation on the same intangible assets in the immediately preceding year in its income tax return which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thus it is clear that there was written down value of these intangible assets which were brought forward in the year under consideration. Thus in our considered view the opening written down value in the year cannot be disputed. In this regard we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in case of HSBC asset management India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 47 taxmann.com 286 wherein it was held as under: "Having perused this Appeal Memo including the impugned orders, we are of the opinion that the Delhi High Court judgment has been delivered on 5th November 2012 and the impugned order was passed on 15th June 2011. The Tribunal has essentially based its conclusion on the consistent stand of the Assessee and that of the Assessing Officer. In dealing with the shift in stand for the subject assessment year, the Tribunal found that this claim of depreciation was raised in the assessment year 2003-2004. The As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee restored the issue to the file of AO for examining the claim of the assessee in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment as discussed above. The relevant extract of the order of Ld. CIT(A) is extracted of under: "I have considered the above referred contentions of the appellant. It is seen that the claim for depreciation on the amount of goodwill was not made before the A.O or in the return of income. The claim has been raised for the first time in the grounds of appeal. Hence the A.O has not been given an opportunity to examine this claim. I have gone through the ratio laid down in the case of CIT vs. Smifs Securities Ltd. reported at 348 ITR 302[SC]. The fact remains that any subordinate judicial authority has to follow the ratio laid down by the superior judicial authority. The claim now made by appellant is supported by recent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, the A.O is directed to consider this claim in the light of the decision of Apex Court referred to above and pass a speaking order. The order of appeal is, therefore allowed." Being aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) both revenu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... an additional ground in appeal and there is no provision in the Act placing restriction on the power of the appellate authority in entertaining an additional ground in appeal. In the absense of any statutory provision, the general principle relating to the amplitude of appellate authority's power being co-terminus with that of the initial authority should normally be applicable. If the tax liability of the assessee is admitted and if the ITO is afforded opportunity of hearing by the appellate authority in allowing the assessee's claim for deduction on the settled view of law, there appears to be no good reason to curtail the powers of the appellate authority under section 251(1)(a). Even otherwise an appellate authority while hearing appeal against the order of subordinate authority has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statutory provision the appellate authority is vested with all the plenary powers which the subordinate authority may have in the matter. There appeared to be no good reason to justify curtai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the assessee. In this regard we note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled the issue of depreciation on goodwill in the case discussed above. The relevant judgment of the Supreme Court is extracted below: "4. Explanation 3 states that the expression 'asset' shall mean an intangible asset, being know-how, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature. A reading the words 'any other business or commercial rights of similar nature' in clause (b) of Explanation 3 indicates that goodwill would fall under the expression 'any other business or commercial right of a similar nature'. The principle of ejusdem generis would strictly apply while interpreting the said expression which finds place in Explanation 3(b). 5. In the circumstances, we are of the view that 'Goodwill' is an asset under Explanation 3(b) to Section 32(1) of the Act. 6. One more aspect needs to be highlighted. In the present case, the Assessing Officer, as a matter of fact, came to the conclusion that no amount was actually paid on account of goodwill. This is a factual finding. The Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssible to create the provisions immediately in the 2nd year for the inventory as discussed above. iii. The provision created by the assessee was representing the unascertained liabilities of the assessee. 19.1 In view of above the AO disallowed the same and added back to the total income of the assessee. 20. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the inventory is in respect of which provision was created were lying from the long-time. The provision was made in the books of accounts as per accounting standard 2 issued by the ICAI. 20.1 The inventory was shown at the market price by creating the provisions in the books of accounts. 20.2 The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submission of the assessee deleted the addition made by the AO by observing as under: "I have carefully considered the assessment order and the submission made by the appellant. The disallowance is mainly made on the ground that it is a contingent liability. However, it is noticed from the details furnished by the appellant that the appellant has made valuation of inventories and made the provision on a systematic bas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spect of the inventory is in its profit and loss account. The relevant extract of the profit and loss account is placed on page no14 of the paper book which is reproduced as under: VF ARVIND BRANDS PRIVATE LTD. SCHEDULES TO ACCOUNTS 2008 01.09.2006 to 31.03.2007 Rs. 000 SCHEDULE 16 MANUFACTURING AND OTHER EXPENSES Employee Cost: Salaries, Bonus etc., [including provision for Leave Encashment Rs. 1,021 (2007: Rs. 72) 210,923 61,619 Contribution to Provident and other funds [Including Provision for gratuity Rs. 8,268 (2007: Rs. 1,892/-)] 19,677 7,032 Staff Welfare Expenses* 5,266 2,092 235,866 70,743 Job work Charges 216,354 85,685 Stores and spares Consumed 118 556 Power and Fuel* 5,327 1,863 Rent [Schedule 19, Note 17(b)]* 64,937 8,033 Rates and Taxes 28,834 18,228 Insurance 2426 1,041 Repairs and Maintenance -Plant and Machinery 9 7 -Buildings 2,818 207 -Others 15,202 4,510 Contract Labour Charges 12,996 5,804 Legal and Professional Charges [Schedule 19, Note 11] 24,36....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l of Rs. 469 million, they themselves should have allowed the same. Thus, the appellant company ought to have been allowed deprecation of Rs. 117.31 million on goodwill. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance made by AO in respect of registration charges of Rs. 3,19,476/-, in spite of the his own observation that the charges are for registration to lease deed for the purpose of business of assessee. 3. The assessee carves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground of grounds of cross objections either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 25. The 1st issue raised by the assessee is that learner CIT-A erred in not allowing the depreciation on the goodwill 117.31 million. 26. The issue raised by the assessee has already been adjudicated along with ground of appeal of the Revenue in paragraph number 13 of this order wherein the issue raised by the assessee in its CO was allowed. Thus the ground raised in the CO by the assessee is allowed. 27. The 2nd issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance ma....