PCIT v. Kuantum Papers Ltd. (2023) 295 Taxman 546/(2024)462 ITR 194 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 32 : Depreciation-Brand name-Intangible assets-Commercial rights-Depreciation is allowable. [S.32 (1)(ii)]

Dismissing the appeal of the Revene the Court held that brand names will fall within scope of intangible assets, which are amenable to depreciation. Followed,  CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012] 210 Taxman 428/348 ITR 302.  CIT v. Glenmark Pharmaceutical Ltd. [2013]213 Taxman 315/351 ITR 359 (Bom) (HC)  (AY. 2008-09)