Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 762 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) which is to be amortized in the five consecutive years - Assessee submitted that the difference was on account of excess of liabilities over the tangible assets and had to be treated on account of intangible asset being on account of business or commercial rights of similar nature covered under section 31(1)(ii) of the Act and the depreciation should be allowed on the same - HELD THAT:- AO was not justified in applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Techno Shares & Stock Ltd. [2009 (9) TMI 18 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] The expenditure claimed by the assessee on acquisition of the Bank is capital in nature which is corroborated by the decision of the Tribunal, Pune Bench, in M/s. Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. v/s DCIT [2014 (1) TMI 1696 - ITAT PUNE] wherein it has been held that the cost of acquisition was intangible in nature and it was on account of business or commercial rights of similar nature which is covered under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. Consequently, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) by allowing the claim of the assessee. We also note that the facts of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Techno Shares and Stock Ltd. [2010 (9) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] are distinguishable in nature insofar as the facts of the present issue is concerned. Therefore, the case law relied upon by the Revenue is not applicable to the facts of the present appeal. Accordingly, the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is hereby upheld by dismissing the grounds raised by the Revenue.
|