Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
$-1 to 3 *|NTHEH|GHcoURToFDELH|ATNEWDELH| + ITA 1 25112011 + ITA 125212011 + ITA 125312011 CIT ""'Appellant Through Mr. Amit Shrivastava, Adv' for Mr' Kamai Sawhney, sr. standing counsel VETSUS SAMTEL GLASS LTD ""' ResPondent Through Mr. Ajay Vohra and Mr' Somnath Shukla, Advs. GORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR ORDER \ % 12.12.2011 The question raised in the present appeals, which pertain to assessment years 2OO3-04, 2OO4-05 and 2006-07, is whether royalty paid was capital or revenue expenditure' A similar issue was raised by the Revenue in ITA No.520/2010, which was dismissed on 26.11.2010. tn trA No.520/2010 it was held that the said expense was revenue in nature. For the reasons stated in ITA No.520/2010, the present appeals are also dismissed. -'/ lt Y -'lt SANJIV KHANNA'J lt I [U "-1 R.V.EASWAR, J DECEMBER 12,2011/vld 2011:DHC:11818-DB
2011:DHC:11818-DB
2011:DHC:11818-DB