9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an appeal at the behest of the Revenue which has emanated from the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals)-VI, Ahmedabad dated 17/09/2010 passed for Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. Ground No.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 3,80,67,627/- on account of depreciation on Marketing & Distribution Right and Licence to use Trademark. 2.1. Facts is brief as emer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e stand of the assessee was affirmed and the appeal was allowed. 3. On hearing the submissions of both the sides, a decision of the ITAT Bench "B" Ahmedabad in assessee's own case bearing ITA No.1679/Ahd/2005 for A.Y. 2001-02 order dated 24/10/2008 titled as ACIT vs. Arvind Brands Ltd. has been cited wherein the issue of claim of depreciation on the intangible assets has been decided in assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, trade marks, licences, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature, being intangible assets. The Revenue is not disputing that the assessee has acquired these two intangible assets in question under an agreement. The items mentioned in Section 32(1)(ii) are wide enough so as to include these types of intangible assets under consideration. Therefore, in our considere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in the past the Tribunal had already considered the said issue and decided in assessee's favour. Now before us, a decision of the Tribunal Bench "C" Ahmedabad for A.Y. 2004-05 bearing ITA No.2320/Ahd/2007 order dated 30/07/2010 titled as DCIT vs. Arvind Brands Ltd. has been placed wherein after detailed discussion it was held that following few decisions of the Tribunal, the disallowance @ 1/4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
