Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (7) TMI 1153

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ror in the decision arrived at by the Tribunal by taking note of the specific entry in contra distinction with the general entry. Therefore, the first substantial question of law has to be necessarily answered against the Revenue. Nature of expenditure - payment for non compete fee - revenue expenditure or capital expenditure - AO alleged that assessee derived any enduring benefit - HELD THAT:- Tribunal accepted the case of the assessee by interpreting the non compete clause in the agreement, which has been reproduced in paragraph 25 of the impugned order. After analyzing the same, the Tribunal held that the tenor of the agreement was only 18 months and it could not be stated that the assessee derived any enduring benefit due to the pa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Act), are directed against the common order dated 14.12.2018 in ITA.Nos.1140 to 1142/Chny/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'C' Bench respectively for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15. 3. The Revenue has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law : Common Question in all the TCAs: Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the software license acquired by the assessee are in the nature of software application and hence, the assessee was eligible to claim depreciation at 60% ? Additional Question in TCA.No.412 of 2019 (AY 2014 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Mr.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue would vehemently contend that what were acquired by the assessee were only licenses, which are intangible. However, the Assessing Officer held that they would fall under Part B of New Appendix I and that the assessee was entitled to depreciation at 25%. 7. As noticed above, the assessee is in the business of registrar and transfer agent as licensed by the SEBI handling large volume of market sensitive data and information, which is available only through general customized application software. The assessee acquired software licenses capitalized during the relevant years in the books of accounts and claimed depreciation at 60%. In paragraph 20 of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed [reported in (2018) 406 ITR 406], to which, one of us (TSSJ) was a party , an identical question came up for consideration wherein the object was printer (computer printer). This Court, after taking into consideration as to how the entries would be interpreted, referred to the decision in the case of Bimetal Bearings Ltd. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu [reported in (1991) 80 STC 167] and held as hereunder : 9. The Hon'ble Division Bench took note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court pointing out that the 'entry' to be interpreted is in a taxing statute; full effect should be given to all words used therein and if a particular article would fall within a description, by the force of words used, it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the assessee, a decision has to be arrived at. We find that there is no error in the decision arrived at by the Tribunal by taking note of the specific entry in contra distinction with the general entry. Therefore, the first substantial question of law has to be necessarily answered against the Revenue. 13. So far as the second substantial question of law is concerned, which arises only for the assessment year 2014-15, the Tribunal accepted the case of the assessee by interpreting the non compete clause in the agreement, which has been reproduced in paragraph 25 of the impugned order. After analyzing the same, the Tribunal held that the tenor of the agreement was only 18 months and it could not be stated that the assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates