Skip to main content

Depreciation On Goodwill Created Through Scheme Of Amalgamation Allowed

Cause Title : Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/s Eltek Sgs Pvt. Ltd., Delhi High Court, ITA 475/2022

Date of Judgment/Order : 01.08.2023

Corum : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharmesh Sharma

Citied: Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Smifs Securities Limited, (2012) 13 SCC 488

Background

The respondent had amalgamated with M/s Valere Power India Limited in terms of a Scheme of Amalgamation which came to be sanctioned by Delhi High Court on 05 February 2014. As per the scheme of amalgamation, where value of liabilities and amount of equity capital allotted /payment to the equity shareholders exceeds the value of assets of the transferor company taken over, such excess shall debited to the goodwill account. Accordingly, the assessee claimed on depreciation on goodwill which claim was denied by the AO. On appeals, the CIT (Appeals) as well as the Appellate Tribunal allowed the depreciation. Hence this appeal.

Judgment

The High Court referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smifs (supra) observed that the IT Dept. contended that it would be the provisions of Section 49 of the Income Tax Act which would apply and that both the CIT (Appeals) as well as the ITAT have clearly erred in holding otherwise. Learned counsel referred to the definition of “cost of acquisition” as spelt out in Section 55(2) of the Act and which had defined that expression to also include goodwill of a business or profession or a trademark or brand name associated with the business or profession or any other intangible asset.

Section 49 deals with cost with reference to certain modes of acquisition while Section 55 refers to the meaning of "cost of acquisition".

The HC observed that the provisions of the Act referred to by learned counsel for the appellant are placed in a Chapter dealing with the “Capital Gains”. That Chapter itself pertains to profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset and Section 47 of the Act in express terms excludes the transfer of a capital asset in terms of a scheme of amalgamation.

The HC then rejecting the view of the Dept. held that it is well settled that a transfer in terms of a scheme of amalgamation which is sanctioned is accomplished by operation of law as opposed to an act of parties. The assessee's the goodwill has enumerated from the decision of the Hon'ble High Court and not out of accounting principles. It is in that backdrop that the decision in Smifs assumes significance. The judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Smifs clearly recognises goodwill to be an intangible asset and on which depreciation can clearly be claimed in terms of Section 32(1) of the Act.


Comments

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...