Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that goodwill arising from slump sale of a going concern is a depreciable intangible asset under section 32(1)(ii...
Income Tax : Analysis of depreciation rates under the Income-tax Act (WDV method) from AY 2003-04 onwards and the useful lives specified under ...
Income Tax : Learn key provisions of depreciation under Section 32, including eligibility, ownership, usage conditions, asset types, and applic...
Income Tax : Learn how small businesses in India can optimize tax benefits through strategic structuring, presumptive taxation, deductions, MSM...
Income Tax : Depreciation is statutory deduction that allows businesses to set off cost of their tangible & intangible assets over their useful...
Company Law : Key Features of Fixed Asset Management Tool with Depreciation Calculator for Companies ♦ Line wise SLM and WDV Depreciation as p...
Income Tax : Addressing the concerns raised by Agriculture Produce Market Committees (APMCs), it has been decided not to levy the 2% TDS on cas...
Income Tax : The proviso to section 32 provides that the aggregate deduction, in respect of depreciation of buildings, machinery, plant or furn...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that the amendment excluding goodwill from depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) applies prospectively from 01.04.2...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation was allowable for assessment years prior to AY 2021-22...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s challenge to depreciation claims on leased assets after the Bombay High Court held tha...
Income Tax : The Chennai ITAT held that transfer pricing benchmarking cannot ignore extraordinary business circumstances arising from the shutd...
Income Tax : Even though the assessee had no business operations, claims based on disclosed assets and records were held bona fide. The Tribuna...
Income Tax : CBDT inserts new Income Tax Rule 8AC -Computation of short term capital gains and written down value under section 50 where deprec...
Income Tax : Income-tax (9th Amendment) Rules, 2019 – Additional depreciation on motor cars and motor vehicles shall be allowed in certai...
Income Tax : A reading of the agreement between STL and the assessee clarifies that a specific amount, i.e., Rs.9 Crores was paid by the assess...
Income Tax : Notification No. 43/2014-Income Tax S.O. 2399(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 295 read with Section 32 of the...
Goods and Services Tax : In view of this situation, it is necessary that the procedure for the issuing of such certificates should be standardized. Such ce...
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mahendra Mills (supra) has laid down that the assessee is entitled to exercise his option even through the filing of revised return and that option cannot be denied to him nor can depreciation be thrust on the assessee against his willingness.
The learned CIT(A) on proper examination of evidences and material rightly came to the conclusion that software is intangible asset and was loaded in the system of machine. The learned CIT(A) also rightly held that installation of software could be checked by the technical person whether it was loaded in the system or not. Therefore, the finding in the survey cannot be relied upon. Even the AO has accepted the fact that some of the software were developed locally and installed in the system.
The Senior Counsel argued at length, whether such non compete right constitute is a right in rem or otherwise, is a matter to be decided by an appropriate higher judicial forum. In the instant proceedings, we cannot import the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Smifs (supra), wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held that goodwill was an intangible asset and eligible for depreciation.
The machinery which was purchased by the assessee in the course of expansion of new Project was installed in the year 1996-97 relevant to the Asst. Year 1997-98. There is nothing on record to suggest that the assessee had put the machinery to use during the Asst. Year 1998-99. It appears that the assessee had claimed 100% depreciation as the project was completely abandoned later in the year 1999. Since the machinery was never put to use by the assessee no depreciation is allowable for the Asst. Year 1998-99.
In the present case, the Fly Ash Handling System, even though classified under plant and machinery as a general item, is still qualified as a different class under the heading ‘Air pollution control equipment’ entitled for higher amount of depreciation. Therefore, the special category, under which air pollution control equipment is placed, applies to the Fly Ash Handing System installed by the assessee. Its eligibility for higher amount of depreciation will not be shadowed by the general rate provided for plant and machinery.
whether a charitable trust is entitled to depreciation under section 32 of the Act in respect of assets owned by it, was dealt with by a Division Bench of this court in CIT v. Raipur Pallottine Society [1989] 180 ITR 579 by placing reliance on a Division Bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne [1984] 146 ITR 28 and has held that depreciation is nothing but decrease in value of property through wear, deterioration or obsolescence and allowance is made for this purpose in book keeping, accountancy, etc.
The depreciation u/s 32 is allowed on the actual cost of the assets. The term ‘actual cost’ has been defined in section 43(1) according to which, ‘actual cost’ means ‘the actual cost of the assets to the assessee reduced by that portion of the cost thereof, if any, as has been met directly or indirectly by any other person or authority’. So, the only deduction permissible from the actual cost is the amount, which has been met by any other person or authority.
During the assessment year 2006-07 in question in the provisions laid down u/s 32(i)(iia) there was specific condition alongwith installation of new plant or machinery after 31st March, 2005 that the new plant or machinery must also be acquired after 31st March, 2005.
With the insertion of the Explanation-I to Section 32 w.e.f. 1.4.1998 there is no doubt that where the assessee is the lessee of the building in which he carries on business which is not owned by him but in respect of which the assessee holds a lease or other right of occupancy and any capital expenditure is incurred by the assessee of any structure or doing of any work in or in relation to by way of renovation, extension or for improvement to the building, then the provisions of the Income Tax Act, will apply as if the said structure or work is a building owned by the assessee.
Having gone through the orders of the authorities below we find that the claim of the assessee that the building in question was purchased by it and was in use for the purpose of its business was not denied by the AO. The AO has disallowed the claimed depreciation only on the basis that the building was yet to be registered in the name of the assessee company.
