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

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Attached assets to be returned after revival of company

In A. Talukdar & Company (Fertilizer) Private Limited Vs. Respondent: The Official Liquidator, High Court of Calcutta and Ors., the Hon'ble Supreme Court said that If an order to wind up a company is recalled and the company is revived, it is entitled to get back from the official liquidator its entire assets. Tenants who occupied the premises during the proceedings shall go out. The company court can evict them.
Post a Comment
Read more