- Saturday, January 28, 2012, 6:28
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 313 views
CIT v. Yamaha Motor India Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 297 (Delhi) - The issue under consideration in this case is whether depreciation is allowable on the written down value of the entire block, even though the block includes some machinery which has already been discarded and hence, cannot be put to use during the relevant previous year.
Full Article
- Saturday, January 28, 2012, 6:27
- Income Tax
- 357 views
B. Raveendran Pillai v. CIT (2011) 332 ITR 531 (Kerala)- Under section 32(1)(ii), depreciation is allowable on intangible assets, being know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, license, franchise, or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature.
Full Article
- Sunday, January 1, 2012, 17:50
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 6 views
Federal Bank Ltd. v. ACIT (2011) 332 ITR 319 (Kerala High Court) - On this issue, the High Court held that the rate of depreciation of 60% is available to computers and there is no ground to treat the communication equipment as computers. Hence, EPABX and mobile phones are not computers and therefore, are not entitled to higher depreciation at 60%.
Full Article
- Wednesday, October 19, 2011, 10:10
- Income Tax
- 86 views
DCIT, New Delhi Vs M/s NTPC-SAIL Power Supply Co Ltd - Whether after insertion of proviso to section 36(1)(iii), the interest paid on capital borrowed for acquisition of an asset for extension of existing business or profession for any period beginning from the date on which the capital was borrowed for acquisition of the asset till the date on which such asset was first put to use, is rightly not allowed as deduction and the interest income earned on FDRs made from surp..
Full Article
- Friday, October 14, 2011, 21:11
- Income Tax
- 24 views
Hindustan Platinum Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) - Statement given u/s 131 cannot be the only basis for disallowing the claim of depreciation when it is shown with documentary evidence that the admission made in the statement recorded was under a mistake or misapprehension. Assessee is not entitled to claim loss u/s 28 on account bad debt of the advance given as inter corporate deposit without establishing the fact that it was a trade advance
Full Article
- Tuesday, January 18, 2011, 11:39
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 101 views
On merits, s. 32(1)(ii) allows depreciation in respect of know-how, patent, copyrights, trademarks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature. The term “commercial rights” are such rights which are obtained for effectively carrying on business and commerce. “Commerce” is a wide term which encompasses many a facet. Accordingly, any right obtained for carrying on business with effectiveness comes within the sweep of meaning o..
Full Article
- Wednesday, October 20, 2010, 17:51
- Income Tax
- 1 views
M/s Frick India Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) - There was a composite agreement titled as 'intellectual property license and non compete agreement' vide which several valuable rights including the right to use the trademark, technical know-how including right to export to 30 countries have been granted over a long period of ten years to the assessee, which gave rise to a benefit of enduring nature. However, the AO has allowed the same as revenue expenditure without applicatio..
Full Article
- Thursday, July 1, 2010, 6:57
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 47 views
Till AY 1996-97 unabsorbed depreciation could be set off against income under any head. From AY 1997-98 to 2001-2002 unabsorbed depreciation could be set off only against business income. From AY 2002-2003 onwards unabsorbed depreciation could again be set off against income under any head of income.
Full Article