TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 578
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 on 09.10.2018 declaring total loss of Rs. 27,52,15,688/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny on the issue of investment in intangible assets. In the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer found that the intangible assets were generated as an outcome of IRM Brands Pvt. Ltd. (transferor company) being amalgamated with CPL Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (assessee company). It transpired that the goodwill of Rs. 161,04,63,611/- was generated in the process of this amalgamation. The Assessing Officer further noticed that the transferor company IRM Brands Pvt. Ltd....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Ahmedabad-3 ("Ld. PCIT") erred in passing order dated 22 March 2024 ("Revisionary Order") under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("IT Act") on a non-existent company and thus, the impugned Revisionary Order is bad in law and deserves to be set aside. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. PCIT erred in initiating revisionary proceedings under section 263 of the IT Act against the non-existent company which was succeeded to the Appellant. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. PCIT erred in holding that the assessment order dated 12 April 2021 ("Original Assessment Order") pass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of simple rectification u/s 154 of the Act and no revisional order under Section 263 of the Act could have been passed on such an issue. The Ld. Sr. Counsel disputed the addition as made by the AO and submitted that the depreciation on goodwill was admissible in view of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Smifs Securities Limited, (348 ITR 302). The Ld. Sr. Counsel also relied upon the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Aculife Healthcare (P.) Limited in ITA No.304/Ahd/2020 dated 14.10.2022 which was upheld by the jurisdictional High Court as reported in 155 taxmann.com 283 (Gujarat). The Ld. Sr. Counsel submitted that when the addition made by the AO itself was wrong, no revisional order u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Act had disallowed the depreciation on goodwill as claimed by the assessee but in the computation of income he had made addition of Rs. 10,89,82,058/- only. Thus, there was mistake in the order of the Assessing Officer in respect of quantum of addition on account of depreciation on goodwill. The fact that there was an error in the assessment order in respect of quantum of addition, has also not been disputed by the assessee. Thus, the fact that the order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue has not been disputed. The contention of the assessee is that this was only a mistake apparent from record and should have been subjected to rectification proceeding under Section 154 of the Act. Reliance has been pla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preclude the Ld. PCIT from exercising his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act, given as per the statute. The only relevant aspect which needs to be examined is whether the order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the internet of the revenue. In the present case the Assessing Officer had wrongly disallowed the depreciation on goodwill of Rs. 10,89,82,058/-; as against the claim of Rs. 27,63,20,888/- made by the assessee. Therefore, the order of the Assessing Officer was not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the interests of the revenue and the Ld. PCIT had rightly exercised his jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. 6.2 As regarding the contention of the assessee that no disallowance in respect of the depreciatio....