Agreeko Energy Rental Vs DCIT
Finin2min Judgment Intelligence is provided for general informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal, tax, accounting, investment or other professional advice and is not a substitute for advice on the user's specific facts. The Finin2min summary, Q&A, reliance profile, fact-match indicators, comparisons and practical takeaways are editorial analysis and are not part of the Court/Tribunal judgment. Before citing, filing, advising or acting on a case, read the complete official judgment/order, verify the cause title, case number, coram, date, applicable statutory text and jurisdiction, and check subsequent appellate history, review/SLP status and later amendments. A similar fact pattern does not guarantee the same outcome. No advocate-client, CA-client or other professional relationship is created by use of this page.
Case in 2 minutes
Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year.
Result: Operative order controls. The controlling text is the reasoning and operative order in the packaged judgment, not this editorial summary.
Case snapshot
Sections / provisions: See packaged judgment
Questions before the Court / Tribunal
- Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year.
- What factual, statutory and procedural conditions control the relief?
- How does the operative order apply to the parties and the challenged proceeding?
Material facts and procedural background
॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे “ए” न्यायपीठ, पुणे में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.1545/PUN/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Aggreko Energy Rental India Pvt. Ltd., 501, The Chambers, Plot No. 4/12,13, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411 014 PAN : AAHCA2440E . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri Alisagar Rampurwala & Pratik Shah Revenue by : Shri Ramnath Murkunde सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 29/11/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 20/01/2023 आदे श / ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; The captioned appeal is filed at the instance of the
assessee against the order of Commissioner of
3.1 The assessee is a resident private limited
3.2 Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the
authorities below, the assessee is in appeal before us
Appellant / assessee submissions
contended that, since the goodwill was acquired prior
assessment years. It is further argued that, the
Revenue / respondent submissions
The packaged judgment does not separately label the respondent's submissions in an independently extractable passage. No contention is inferred; read the full order.
Court / Tribunal analysis and reasoning
13.2 Therefore in our considered view, the WDV of
meaning of section 43(6)(b). And we find that,
Operative decision and relief
The result is recorded as Operative order controls. The exact relief and qualifications are controlled by the final operative paragraphs of the packaged judgment.
Ratio and legal principle
- The packaged judgment addresses Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year. The precise proposition must be read with the Court/Tribunal's reasoning and operative directions.
- Reliance depends on matching the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and material evidence recorded in the judgment.
Why this judgment matters
This decision is relevant to practitioners and affected parties dealing with depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year. Its value lies in showing how the adjudicating forum connected the applicable rule to the proved facts and procedural posture.
Practitioner action points
- Match the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and decisive evidence before relying on the result.
- Verify current appellate, review and SLP history and any later amendment or controlling authority.
- Attach the complete judgment to the working paper or filing and cite the paragraph/page supporting the proposition.
Can I rely on this judgment?
| Authority level | ITAT |
|---|---|
| Source integrity | Sanitized readable full judgment copy packaged; official primary replacement pending |
| Repository release | HOLD_SOURCE_OR_LATER_HISTORY |
| Reliance rule | Verify current history and cite the judgment's narrow proposition, not the editorial headnote. |
Does this case match your facts?
Stronger match when
- The same primary issue is raised.
- The same statutory version and jurisdiction apply.
- The procedural stage and burden of proof are comparable.
- The material documentary record is substantially similar.
Weaker / distinguishable when
- A later higher-court ruling changes the position.
- The statutory provision or relevant period differs.
- The evidence or procedural chronology is materially different.
- A defect decisive here was cured in the user's case.
Questions this judgment answers
What was the main dispute in Agreeko Energy Rental Vs DCIT?
Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year.
Which facts matter most?
॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे “ए” न्यायपीठ, पुणे में ॥ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.1545/PUN/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Aggreko Energy Rental India Pvt. Ltd., 501, The Chambers, Plot No. 4/12,13, Viman Nagar, Pune – 411 014 PAN : AAHCA2440E . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee by : Shri Alisagar Rampurwala & Pratik Shah Revenue by : Shri Ramnath…
What did the ITAT Pune decide?
Operative order controls
What legal principle can be taken from the judgment?
The packaged judgment addresses Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year. The precise proposition must be read with the Court/Tribunal's reasoning and operative directions. Reliance depends on matching the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and material evidence recorded in the judgment.
Which provisions should be checked?
The exact provisions identified in the packaged judgment and their version applicable to the relevant period.
When is the case most useful?
When the user's facts raise the same issue - Depreciation on goodwill: determining written down value/original cost in the relevant assessment year - at a comparable procedural stage and under the same statutory version.
What could distinguish the case?
Different evidence, jurisdiction, statutory period, procedural chronology, or later controlling authority can materially change the result.
Can it be cited without another current-law check?
No. Read the packaged judgment and verify current appellate/review/SLP history, statutory amendments and jurisdiction before citation or advice.
Section / provision impact
- See the statutory provisions identified in the packaged judgment.
Case network
Similar issue / useful comparison
- BASHIR AHMAD SOFI V ITO WARD 1 - ITAT Amritsar
- Chennai Port Authority v. NFAC - Madras High Court
Different outcome / possible distinction
- No source-reviewed contrasting case is linked yet.
Full judgment and source control
Read / download packaged judgment record
Source class: SANITIZED_LOCAL_FULL_JUDGMENT_COPY_PRIMARY_PENDING · Repository status: HOLD_SOURCE_OR_LATER_HISTORY
Finin2min Judgment Intelligence is provided for general informational and educational purposes only. It is not legal, tax, accounting, investment or other professional advice and is not a substitute for advice on the user's specific facts. The Finin2min summary, Q&A, reliance profile, fact-match indicators, comparisons and practical takeaways are editorial analysis and are not part of the Court/Tribunal judgment. Before citing, filing, advising or acting on a case, read the complete official judgment/order, verify the cause title, case number, coram, date, applicable statutory text and jurisdiction, and check subsequent appellate history, review/SLP status and later amendments. A similar fact pattern does not guarantee the same outcome. No advocate-client, CA-client or other professional relationship is created by use of this page.