2018 (7) TMI 2088 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of depreciation on Goodwill - ITAT allowed the claim - HELD THAT - Revenue has fairly stated that so far as the appeal against the decision of the learned Tribunal for the Assessment Year 2011-12 the said appeal has been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court 2017 (10) TMI 373 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . It is reported that against the decision for earlier assessment years viz. A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 the Revenue is before the Hon ble Supreme Court. Nothing is on record whether against the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in for A.Y. 2011-12 any appeal is preferred before the Hon ble Supreme Court or not. Be that as it may so far as this Court is concerned the issue is concluded against the Revenue in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in. Under the circumstances no substantial question of law arises in the present appeal as the question raised is squarely covered against the Revenue in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court 2017 (10) TMI 373 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of depreciation on goodwill claimed by the assessee.
2. Upholding the decision of CIT(A) by the ITAT in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill.
3. Appeal by the Revenue against the decision of the ITAT.

Analysis:
1. The assessee claimed depreciation on goodwill in the revised Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation on goodwill claimed by the assessee. The assessee then appealed before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who allowed the appeal, leading to the disallowance being deleted.

2. The Revenue, dissatisfied with the decision of the CIT(A), approached the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The ITAT, considering its earlier decisions for Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12, upheld the decision of the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance of depreciation on goodwill. The Revenue, feeling aggrieved by the ITAT's decision, preferred the present appeal before the High Court.

3. During the hearing of the present appeal, the advocate for the Revenue acknowledged that a similar appeal for the Assessment Year 2011-12 had been dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The advocate further mentioned that appeals for earlier assessment years were pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court noted that the issue was concluded against the Revenue based on the decision of the Division Bench for the Assessment Year 2011-12. Consequently, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the present appeal and dismissed it accordingly.