9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 385X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a consequence of this agreement the seller has forfeited his right to conduct business in the territory for a period of 30 months. Therefore, the assessee in effect has acquired a right of the seller. Therefore, this particular payment as per the agreement falls within section 32(1)(ii) as a result, the assessee is entitled for depreciation on the non-compete fee paid to the seller. Hence, Ld. CIT(A) was right in directing the AO to calculate the depreciation accordingly, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and reject the grounds raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee in their respective Appeal and Cross Objection. - I.T.A. No. 4308/DEL/2011, C.O. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21,28,599/- paid on account of non-compete fee as the benefit of such non competition convenant is for a limited period of 30 months. 3. That the respondent reserves its right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of objection either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 31.10.2004, declaring total loss of ₹ 10,95,94,750/-. The assessment in this case was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) on 29.12.2006 and AO assessed the loss of ₹ 7,26,83,466/-. The AO has disallowed non-compete fee paid by the assessee and also disallowed excess depreciation claimed by the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uyer. As a consequence of this agreement the seller has forfeited his right to conduct business in the territory for a period of 30 months. Therefore, the assessee in effect has acquired a right of the seller. Therefore, this particular payment as per the agreement falls within section 32(1)(ii) of the I.T. Act, 1961, as a result, the assessee is entitled for depreciation on the non-compete fee paid to the seller. Hence, Ld. CIT(A) was right in directing the AO to calculate the depreciation accordingly, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and reject the grounds raised by the Revenue as well as by the Assessee in their respective Appeal and Cross Objection. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
