2018 (3) TMI 1912 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 153C - Depreciation at 25% on Licence to collect toll - Whether assessee was eligible to claim depreciation on Licence to collect toll considering it as an intangible asset in terms of section 32(1)(ii)? - HELD THAT - Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) following the earlier order of the Tribunal 2014 (1) TMI 443 - ITAT PUNE in assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 allowed the claim of the assessee. The year under appeals are starting from assessment years 2005-06 to 2011-12. The assessment has been completed as pointed earlier under Section 153C r.w.s 143(3) of the Act. In the first instance, we hold that the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation at 25% on the right to collect toll being an intangible asset. Accordingly, we uphold the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in this regard and also uphold the direction to the Assessing Officer to withdraw the deduction allowed on amortization of the costs for assessment year 2005-06. It may be pointed out that similar issue also arose before the Tribunal in the case of Ashoka Infrastructure Ltd., 2017 (6) TMI 1167 - ITAT PUNE relating to assessment years 2006-07 to 2011- 12. Similar issue arose in the said appeal and was decided in favour of the assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Appeal against allowing depreciation on 'Licence to collect toll'
- Cross-Objections relating to validity of Notice under Section 153C and assessment proceedings

Analysis:

1. Appeal against Allowing Depreciation on 'Licence to Collect Toll':
The Revenue filed appeals against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowing depreciation at 25% on the 'Licence to collect toll.' The assessee, engaged in infrastructure development and maintenance of toll stations, claimed depreciation on the right to collect toll as an intangible asset. The original assessment denied this claim, but the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) reversed this decision. The Revenue argued that the matter was subjudiced as an appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. However, the Tribunal, after considering the facts and previous decisions, upheld the Commissioner's order, allowing the depreciation. The Tribunal noted that similar issues were decided in favor of the assessee in other cases, supporting the allowance of depreciation on the right to collect toll.

2. Cross-Objections on Validity of Notice under Section 153C:
The assessee raised Cross-Objections challenging the validity of the Notice issued under Section 153C, the assessment proceedings, and the assessment order. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) initially ruled against the assessee regarding the notice's validity but allowed the depreciation claim on merits. Since the Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee on the depreciation issue, the Cross-Objections regarding the notice's validity were considered academic and dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order allowing the depreciation, which indirectly addressed the Cross-Objections related to the notice under Section 153C.

In conclusion, the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Cross-Objections by the assessee were dismissed, with the Tribunal upholding the allowance of depreciation on the 'Licence to collect toll' as an intangible asset. The Tribunal's decision was based on previous rulings and the merits of the case, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeals and Cross-Objections.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the judgment, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal arguments and decisions made by the Tribunal.