2015 (6) TMI 141

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... We are concerned in this case in so far as the legality and validity of the order dated 20th February, 2013 of the Tribunal to the extent of the following four questions:- a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in holding that the sm of Rs. 33,30,203/- being software expenses is revenue in nature, relying on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the cases of CIT V/s. Amway India Enterprises (2012) (346 ITR 341) and Asahi India Safety Glass Limited (2012) (346 ITR 329) without appreciating the fact that the decisions relied upon are distinguishable from the facts of the instant case ? b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in deleting....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and of the assessee, which was countered by the revenue, a partial relief came to be granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 5. The assessee desired complete relief and not getting the same had urged that the questions (1) & (2) raised the issue which is fully covered by the Tribunal's order in its own case for the assessment year 1995-96 in Income Tax Appeal No.70/Mum/2001. There is further reliance placed on the judgment of the High Court of Delhi. That reliance is noted in para 2.3.1 of the Tribunal's order. Equally, the Tribunal notes that the facts and circumstances in the previous assessment year and the assessment year in question are identical. There is absolutely no distinction pointed out by the departmenta....