1.

Brand Name
7. B Raveendran Pillai v CIT 332 ITR 549 (HC)
Purchase of hospital as going concern along with goodwill Assessee
entitled for depreciation.
8. KEC International Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2010) 41 SOT 43 (Mum.).
Where assessee company received brand name under a scheme of
arrangement under section 391 to 394 of Companies Act 1956, assessee
was eligible for depreciation in respect of brand name under section 32(1)(ii)
of the Income Tax Act.

1.1 Secti on 32(1)(ii ) of the Act, was intr oduced in Finance

Act 1998 which provided that depreciation would also be
avail able on intangible assets acquir ed on or after April 1,
1998. The term intangible asset has been defined in Part B
of Appendix 1 of the I ncome Tax Rules as know-how,
patent, copyri ght s, tr ademark s, li censes, franchise or any
other business or commercial ri ghts of simil ar nature.
Speci fi c intangible asset s i.e. know-how, patent s, copyri ght s, tr ademark s, l
icences, franchi ses are foll owed by the expr ession any other business of
commer cial ri ghts of simil ar natur e. I nterpretati on of this expr ession and it s
scope has been always bone of contenti on and matt er of judgement by vari ous
court s. It is sett led generall y that this expression menti oned above by it self
would include all ki nds of commercial ri ghts but for the words simil ar nature.
In such situation, the rule of Ejusdem Generi s would apply. The scope of the
rule is that words of a general nature foll owing specific and parti cular words
should be construed as li mit ed to things, which are of the same nature as those
specified. The general words take the colour from the specific words. Accor
dingly,
However, recent decision of Delhi High Court in case Hindustan Coca Cola has
opened Pandoras Box. After this decision, a view is ari sen that even goodwill
simpli cit or may be eli gible for depreciation. Such decision was in respect of
Secti on 263, where i t is decided that that revision is not possible as i t is a
plausible view. On merit s there are vari ous pr ecedent s for and agai nst. The
law on the subject can only be cull ed out from vari ous decided cases on the
subject.