9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26/05/2022 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short "the Act"], which ascended out of separate orders of assessment passed u/s 143(3) or 143(3) r.ws. 153A of the Act by the Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nashik [for short "AO"] for assessment years [for short "AY"] 2017-18 to 2018-19. 2. The solitary issue involved in this bunch of appeals is identical i.e. claim of depreciation on intangible asset being "License to Collect Toll", hence with the agreement of parties present, the matter is heard together for a consolidated order, resultantly the adjudication in lead case ITA/591/PUN/2022 positioned in succeeding paragraphs, shall mutatis mutandis apply to ITA/592 to 593/PUN/2022. 3. In advancing the matter for ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Per contra, the Ld. CIT(A) in deciding the issue in favour of the respondent assessee has adopted judicial consistency by placing reliance on the Tribunal's earlier years decisions. 5. In the absence of assessee we proceeded ex-parte and heard the learned representative of the department; and subject to the provisions of rule 18 ITAT, Rules, 1963 perused case records, case laws relied upon by the appellant as well the respondent and duly considered the facts of the case in the light of settled legal position which are forewarned to parties present. 6. After giving our thoughtful consideration to vehement rival contentions and we find no merit in the Revenue's stand as the very same issue had arisen between these parties in earlier AYs, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial right" or "intangible asset". This definitely would qualify for depreciation @ 25%. To the same effect is the decisions of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of GVK Jaipur Expressway Ltd., the High Court has taken into consideration all the decisions and more particularly the decisions of (i) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Moradabad Toll Road Co. Ltd.; (ii) Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. [reported in [2013] 30 taxmann.com 207]; (iii) Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. VGP Housing (P.) Ltd. [reported in [2016] 66 taxmann.com 354]; (iv) Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Jawahar Kala Kendra [reported in [2014] 43 taxmann.com 159]; (v) Hon'ble R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
