TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 986X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cated. We note that additional ground was not adjudicated by the ITAT as there was no discussion on the subject. However, since the assessee has submitted photocopy of the ITAT receipt for filing additional ground in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate that appeal [ 2020 (3) TMI 416 - ITAT MUMBAI] be recalled only to consider the veracity and adjudication of the said additional ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer has relied upon the Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Sharp Business System (supra). It was further noted that as against the above learned CIT(A) had relied upon the case laws from Hon'ble Karnataka High Court and Hon'ble Madras High Court, which were in favour of the assessee. It is mentioned that the Tribunal noted that no decision of Hon'ble J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come to the notice of the assessee and in that case depreciation for non-compete fees was allowed. Quoting the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Surashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 227 and in the case of Mepco Industries Ltd. Madurai Vs. CIT (2010) 1 SCC 434 the assessee has submitted that the mistakes have crept in the ITAT s order and the same should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal ground. That learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the claim of depreciation amounting to ₹ 1,28,38,65,000/- for non-compete fees u/s. 32 of the I.T. Act. In this regard the assessee has also produced photocopy of the receipt from the ITAT. 4. Upon careful consideration, we note that in Miscellaneous Application there is no whisper of additional ground remaining un-adjudicated. We not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
