Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income-Tax -8 Mumbai...

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax -8 Mumbai v. M/S Olympus Elevators Pvt Ltd

High Court 02 Dec 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax -8 Mumbai v. M/S Olympus Elevators Pvt Ltd
Date of order
02 Dec 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax -8 Mumbai v. M/S Olympus Elevators Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the assessee was eligible for depreciation in respect of intangible asset valued at Rs.39.24 crore instead of depreciation value at Rs.2.91 crore as held by the Assessing Officer and the CIT (A) is the question raised in this appeal 2.The ITAT...

Decision: The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Ladda IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 4598 of 2010. The Commissioner of Income-tax -8 Mumbai ... Appellant. Versus M/s Olympus Elevators Pvt Ltd ... Respondent. Mr Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Dr K. Shivram with Mr Ajay R. Singh for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.R. Joshi, JJ. DATE : 2 December, 2011. P.C. :- 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the assessee was eligible for depreciation in respect of intangible asset valued at Rs.39.24 crore instead of depreciation value at Rs.2.91 crore as held by the Assessing Officer and the CIT (A) is the question raised in this appeal 2.The ITAT in para 9 of its order has recorded a finding that the assessee had paid Rs.36.5 crore and had incurred liability to the extent of 33.15 crore. Thus, the total consideration for acquiring the asset was Rs. 69.65 crore and the assessee had received total liabilities and current asset including good will at Ladda 33.41 crore. Accordingly, the ITAT has held that the balance amount of Rs.39.24 crore (Rs. 69.65 crore minus Rs. 30.41 crore) were the tangible assets on which the assessee was entitled for depreciation. The decision of the ITAT is based on a finding of fact. No substantial question of law is raised. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. (A.R.Joshi,J) (J.P.Devadhar,J.)
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan