In Itta/163/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-Iv v. Moschip Semiconductor Technology Ltd, the High Court (2012) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: In the circumstances the appeal is misconceived and isaccordingly dismissed. _________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 26[th] November, 2012 GRR _______________________________ M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
ITTA No. 163 of 2012
Dated: 26-11-2012
Between:
The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV,Hyderabad
And
Moschip Semiconductor Technology Ltd.,Hyderabad
…Appellant
…Respondent.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
ITTA No. 163 of 2012
Judgment(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)
This appeal by the Revenue preferred against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad “A” Bench (for short ‘theTribunal’) dated 13-11-2009 allowing ITA No. 323/Hyd/2009 ismisconceived, since the order of the Tribunal is passed pusruant to anagreement between the assessee and the department that theexpenditure in question should be treated as capital in nature andallowed depreciation at 60% on the said expenditure.
In the circumstances the appeal is misconceived and isaccordingly dismissed.
_________________________
GODA RAGHURAM, J
26[th] November, 2012
GRR
_______________________________
M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, J
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.