Case Law › High Court › Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Intertek...

Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Intertek India Pvt. Ltd

High Court 03 Feb 2016 In favour of: Assessee

Forum / Bench

High Court · dhcdb

Parties

Date of order

03 Feb 2016

Assessment year(s)

—

Outcome

Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income Tax-4 v. Intertek India Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2016) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The question urged by the Revenue as to whether depreciation can be claimed on goodwill is answered in the affirmative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT ITA 104/2016 Page 1 of 2 v.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 7.+ ITA 104/2016 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Ashok K. Manchanda, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms Vibhooti Malhotra, Junior Standing Counsel. versus INTERTEK INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr Satyen Sethi, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R% 03.02.2016 CM No.3034/2016 1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in re-filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The application stands disposed of. ITA 104/2016 3. The question urged by the Revenue as to whether depreciation can be claimed on goodwill is answered in the affirmative i.e. against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT ITA 104/2016 Page 1 of 2 v. Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012] 348 ITR 302 (SC). No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J FEBRUARY 03, 2016 MK VIBHU BAKHRU, J ITA 104/2016 Page 2 of 2

Facing a similar income-tax issue?

Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.

✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA

This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.

Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.