Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.25 seconds)
Documents citing Jt. Commisioner Of Income Tax (Osd) ... vs M/S. Andhra Expressway Ltd, Mumbai on 31 May, 2022

Bscpl Aurang Tollway ... vs Dcit., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad on 28 January, 2026

13. The learned counsel for the assessee, further referring to various judicial precedents, including the decisions of ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT Vs. Mumbai Nasik Expressway Limited in ITA No. 3910/Mum/2017 dated 15.04.2019 and the decision in the case of ITO Vs. Andhra Pradesh Expressway Limited in ITA No. 1522/Mum/2023 dated 25.08.2023 submitted 19 ITA No.612/Hyd/2024 BSCPL Aurang Tollway Limited that, the Tribunal has consistently taken a view and held that, the expenditure incurred for development of toll road on a BOT basis gives rise to an intangible asset in the form of right to collect toll revenue and the same falls within the purview of intangible asset, as per Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, on the basis of one possible view, has treated the cost incurred for development of toll road as capital expenditure and the same has been treated as intangible asset in the books of accounts and depreciation has been claimed under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The A.O., after considering relevant documents, has rightly considered the submissions of the assessee and passed the assessment order. Therefore, he submitted that, the assessment order passed by the A.O. is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Thus, the Ld. PCIT has erred in setting aside the assessment order in terms of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1