Software expenditure, club payments, depreciation and section 14A issues were decided by following earlier Tribunal orders.

Software expenditure and depreciation claims were followed in line with earlier Tribunal orders where facts remained unchanged, so the software expenditure disallowance and depreciation on residential properties were allowed to the assessee. Payments to clubs were also treated consistently with prior years and the Revenue's objection failed. By contrast, notional interest income from the toll road, depreciation on the toll road, and the section 14A read with rule 8D computation were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration or recomputation in accordance with earlier directions, with those grounds allowed for statistical purposes.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether software expenditure was capital in nature; (ii) whether notional interest income in respect of toll road required fresh adjudication; (iii) whether payments made to clubs were disallowable; (iv) whether depreciation on residential properties was allowable; (v) whether depreciation on toll road was allowable; and (vi) whether disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D required fresh computation.

Issue (i): Whether software expenditure was capital in nature.

Analysis: The issue was treated as a recurring one and was found to have been decided in earlier years in favour of the assessee. No change in facts was shown, and the earlier view of the Tribunal was followed.

Conclusion: The disallowance was deleted and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether notional interest income in respect of toll road required fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The issue was stated to be covered by earlier orders restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration. Following the same course, the matter was sent back for fresh decision in line with the earlier directions.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes.

Issue (iii): Whether payments made to clubs were disallowable.

Analysis: The issue was covered by earlier Tribunal orders in favour of the assessee. The same view was adopted as no distinguishing feature was shown.

Conclusion: The disallowance was upheld in favour of the assessee and the Revenue's ground was dismissed.

Issue (iv): Whether depreciation on residential properties was allowable.

Analysis: The issue had already been decided in favour of the assessee in earlier years, and the facts remained unchanged. The earlier consistent view was followed.

Conclusion: The depreciation claim was allowed in favour of the assessee.

Issue (v): Whether depreciation on toll road was allowable.

Analysis: The issue was stated to have been restored in earlier years for fresh consideration. Following that approach, the matter was again sent back to the Assessing Officer to decide afresh in accordance with the earlier directions.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer and the ground was allowed for statistical purposes.

Issue (vi): Whether disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D required fresh computation.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier orders for preceding years and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for recomputation in accordance with the earlier directions, including the principles governing inclusion of investments and the computation of interest and administrative expenditure disallowance.

Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the Assessing Officer and the grounds were allowed for statistical purposes.

Final Conclusion: Both cross appeals were disposed of with some issues decided finally and others restored for fresh adjudication, resulting in a partial success for the assessee and statistical relief on the remanded issues.

---