Ita/215/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Alpha Design

IN THR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BRBNGALURU Dated this the 14[th]day of September, 2015 | Present THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VINEET SARAN CS THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B MANOHAR | Income Tax Appeal 215/ 2015) Between. 1Commissioner ot Income Tax C R Building, Queens Road Bangalore oDDeputy Commr. Of Income Tax Circle 11 (1), Rashtrothana Bhavan| Nrupathunga Road BangaloreAppellants| (By Sri K V Aravind, Adv. a/w'G Kamaladhar, Adv.) And M/s Alpha Design Technologies Pvt Ltd 24, 12[th]Floor, Service Road| Domlur 2[nd]stage ExtensionIndiranagar, BangaloreRespondent Appeal is filed under 8.260 A of the Income Tax Act,1961 praying to set aside the orders passed by the ITAT,|BangaloreInITA1385/Bang/2013OTLID .1.9O15confirming the order of the appellate Commissioner and)confirm the order of the Dy. Commr. Of Income Tax, Circle11(1), Bangalore. — 2 Appeal coming on for Admission this day,|VineetSaran J, delivered the following:| JUDGMENT Challenging the order of the Tribunal, this appeal hasbeen filed by the Revenue. The assessee is in the business of defence electronics.For the assessment year 2007-08 and 2008-09, assesseeclaimed deferred revenue expenditure which was treated ascapital expenditure by the Assessing Officer. Challenging|the same, assessee filed an appeal which was partly)allowed by the appellate Commissioner who directed the)Assessing Officer to allow depreciation on certain amounts.Agerieved by the said order, Revenue filed an appeal, in)which, though no cross objection was filed by the assessee,|but relying on the decision of the Calcutta, Andhra Pradesh|and Madras High Courts, Tribunal directed the Assessing|Officer to allow the certain claims of the assessee asrevenue expenditure and also to allow depreciation on)capital items for the said two assessment years. 3 Having heard learned counsel for the appellants, we|are of the view that no interference 1s called for with the|order of the Tribunal. As such, we are of the opinion that|no substantial question of law arises in this appeal for)determination by this Court. Appeal is accordingly, dismissed. An| sd/- Judge Sd/-Judge