9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether depreciation is allowable on the expenditure incurred by the assessee for acquisition of technical know-how, which the assessee claims is plant within the meaning of section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The case involved a question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the legality of allowing depreciation for the first time in the assessment year 1971-72 on account of a notional addition made in the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67. The assessee contended that the Income-tax Officer did not consider the capital investment made in plant and machinery, as held by the Tribunal in the earlier assessment years. The appellate authority rejected the claim, stating that depreciation can only be allowed on plant and machinery, not on fees, even if capital in nature. However, the Appellate Tribunal, relying on a decision of the Gujarat High Court, held that technical know-how should be considered as 'plant' under section 32 for depreciation purposes, even if no capital asset directly resulted from it. The interpretation of 'plant' under section 32 was crucial in this case. The Appellate Tribunal, following the decision of the Gujarat High Court, held that technical know-how should be included within the meaning of 'plant' for depreciation purposes. This decision was supported by a previous ruling of the Karnataka High Court, which emphasized that the term 'plant' is not limited to tangible assets and can include intangible assets like technical knowledge. Therefore, the Tribunal was correct in allowing depreciation on the expenditure incurred for acquiring technical know-how, even though it was not claimed in the earlier assessment years. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the decision of the Appellate Tribunal, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Court agreed with the Tribunal's interpretation of 'plant' under section 32, allowing depreciation on the expenditure for technical know-how acquisition, despite not being claimed in previous assessment years. This judgment clarifies that the definition of 'plant' for depreciation purposes is not restricted to tangible assets and can encompass intangible assets like technical knowledge.
|
