2014 (2) TMI 1352

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Respondent : Mr. Ashok Suri ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 28th September 2012, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)-III, Mumbai, for the quantum of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") for the assessment year 2009-10. The sole ground raised by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....epted by the Department and the matter is subjudice before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), following the earlier year's order in assessee's own case, right from the assessment year 1990-91 to 2007-08, treated the said expenditure as revenue in nature and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 3. Before us, both the parties admitted that this ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m/09 wherein the Tribunal at para-5, page-2 has held as under:- "As regards ground No.1, the Tribunal has dealt with this issue at para 3.1 of its order in I.T.A.No.2407/M/08 which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference- 3.1 Ground No.1 is on the issue of allowability of Expenditure incurred on purchase of audio rights treated by the assessing officer as capital expenditure. The asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... addition is made by following the stand of the revenue in the earlier years to keep the issue alive. The first appellate authority applied the decision of the tribunal and deleted the addition. We see no infirmity in the same. In fact, ground 1B of the revenue appeals states that the ground is taken because the department has not accepted the decision of the Tribunal. In view of the above discuss....