9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 1361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty rights and non compete fee, since agreement between parties was a composite agreement, assessee was entitled to depreciation on intellectual property rights as well as on non compete fee. Therefore, the assessee is entitled for depreciation in non-compete fee paid - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A.No.769/Mds./2012 - - - Dated:- 11-2-2015 - SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JJ. Appellant by : Mr.P.Radhakrishnan,JCIT,D.R Respondent by : Mr. S.P.Chidambaram,Advocate ORDER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, J. This appeal is filed by the Revenue, aggrieved by the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-III,Chennai, dated 25.01.2012 in ITA No.165/07-08/A.III passed under section 143(3) re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant s own case has held as under:- 2. In this ground, it has been contended by the assessee that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of deprecation on noncompete fee of ₹ 5,30,00,000. 3. We find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT,Chennai in the case of M/s.Medicorp Tech. India Ltd. (2009) 122 TTJ(Chennai) 394. It is seen that Shri Shaji P Jacob, was the Ld. D.R who had argued the appeal in the case of M/s.Medicorp Tech. India Ltd.(supra). His arguments were discussed by the Tribunal, in details, in its order dated 16.01.2009. In fact one of us was the author of that order. The facts of the case in the present appeal are identical and therefore, we follow the precede ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Pentasoft Technologies Ltd., Vs. Dy. CIT (supra) rendered by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court we find that the issue is decided in favour of the assessee, wherein it was held as follows:- Where assessee carrying on business in software development etc. entered into an agreement with one P for hiving off and transfer of software development and training divisions from P and paid certain amount to P towards acquisition of intellectual property rights and non compete fee, since agreement between parties was a composite agreement, assessee was entitled to depreciation on intellectual property rights as well as on non compete fee. Further the Ld.CIT(A) had also held the issue in favour of the assessee by following the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
