2024 (2) TMI 1103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nst the respective orders of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for the assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15. 2. Since the issues are common and connected and the appeals and cross objections were heard together, these are being disposed off by this common order. REVENUE'S APPEALS : 3. Apropos disallowance under section 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') : The assessee had, during the relevant year, claimed deduction under section 80IC of the Act of Rs.2,01,79,454/- being 30% of profits of Rs.6,72,64,845/- derived from the eligible business i.e. Parwanoo unit. The same was disallowed by the AO. Ld. CIT (A) vide his order dated 09.11.2017, following the orders passed by the ld. CIT (A) in assessee's own case for AYs 2010-11 to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of total expenditure of Rs.2,00,42,000/- holding the royalty payment to be capital in nature and covered within the meaning of intangible asset u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act, after allowing depreciation @ 25% thereon. Ld. CIT (A) deleted the disallowance following the orders passed by the Tribunal in assessee's own case in earlier years. We may gainfully refer to the concluding portion of ld. CIT (A)'s order as under :- "In the present case, the appellant has submitted that in appellant's own case for assessment year 2004-05, the Hon'ble Tribunal has allowed royalty fee paid to Henkel KGaA under section 37(1) of the Act as revenue expenditure on the ground that payment was only for right to use the technical know-how and no bene....