9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 926X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtised amount. However, it is very much apparent that the payment was made to the legal heirs of the deceased partner and thus, the payment was towards the capital/outstanding dues of the deceased partner. It is also apparent that the firm was not a tenant/had not paid for acquisition of tenancy right but has made payments to the legal heirs of the deceased partners and has reflected the same as payment made for acquisition of tenancy rights in its books of account. In such a situation, it cannot be said that the payment was made for acquisition of tenancy rights and accordingly, the question as to whether tenancy rights would fall under the definition of intangible assets for the purpose of claiming depreciation u/s 32 of the Act does not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trademarks, franchises or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature being intangible assets acquired on or after 1.4.1998. The Assessing Officer also relied on the order of the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of M.M. Nissim & Co. Vs ACIT reported in (2007) 18 SOT 274 (Mum) that the tenancy rights acquired by the assessee cannot be equated with the license provided u/s 32 so as to qualify it as an intangible asset eligible for depreciation. The Assessing Officer proceeded to add back the amount of ₹ 5,41,406/- to the income of the assessee which on appeal was also confirmed by the CIT(A). Now, the assessee has approached the ITAT and has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1. That on the facts and in the circumsta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein vide order dated 29.8.2014, ITAT Delhi Bench had ruled that excess consideration paid by the assessee over and above the net value of assets should be considered as goodwill of the business and the same should qualify for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 4. Learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the order of the authorities below and vehemently argued that the assessee's case was distinguishable on facts and the judgments being relied on by the assessee were not in favour of the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the relevant material placed on record. Section 32 of the Act deals with depreciation and the expression 'intangible assets' is defined in section 32(1)(ii) as und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
