1 ITXA3915.09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION KJ INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3915 OF 2009 Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Mumbai )..Appellants Vs. M/s.Deepak Education Ltd., )..Respondents ---- Mr. Vimal Gupta @ Mrs.Padma Divakar for the appellants. Mr.S.C.Tiwari @ Ms.Meghna Bukta for the respondents. ---- CORAM : J. P .DEVADHAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ DATE : 31/1/2011. PC 1 The question of law raised by the Revenue in this Appeal reads thus :- “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in sustaining the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in deleting the disallowances made on account of franchise fee, capital W.I.P and advances since these expenses which are capitalized in the books cannot be written off as revenue expenditure ? 2 ITXA3915.09.sxw 2 The finding of fact recorded by the CIT(A)/Tribunal is that the assessee carrying on the business of tuition classes had sought to introduce E-learning Education business which did not catch up and the expenditure incurred in that process on account of franchise fee, capital work in progress and advances were liable to be allowed as revenue expenditure. 3 On the facts of the present case, in our opinion, the decision of the Tribunal is based on finding of fact. No substantial question of law arises from the order of the Tribunal. Hence, Appeal is dismissed. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J)