Goldmohar Design and Apparel Park Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 209 TTJ 863 (Mum.)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Depreciation-Lease hold rights-Revision is held to be valid. [S. 32(1)(ii)]

The Hon’ble Tribunal held that in order to fall within the realm of ‘any other business or commercial rights of similar nature’ as contemplated in S. 32(1)(ii) of the Act, and therein to be construed as an “intangible asset” eligible for depreciation under the said statutory provision, the ‘right’ under consideration would require to cumulatively satisfy a twofold test viz. (i). the right should be a business or commercial right; and (ii) the right though need not answer the description of the six specified intangible assets viz knowhow, patents, copyrights, trademarks, licenses, or franchises, but must be of a similar nature. The claim of the Assessee is thus rejected. (AY. 12-13)