IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
  30.11.2009 
 3+5# 
.
 Present:       Ms. Rashmi Chopra for the appellant. 
.
.
.
.
 + ITA No. 1222/2009 
 ITA No. 1224/2009                                          (Common Order) 
 The Assessing Officer had disallowed advertising and publicity 
 expenditure as well as royalty paid to the Japanese company treating both as 
 capital in nature.  The CIT(A), however, reversed this decision by holding that 
 both the expenditures would be revenue in nature and allowed the appeal of the 
 assessee.  The ITAT has affirmed this finding of the CIT (A) and for this 
 purpose it relied upon its own decision in the case of the very same assessee in 
 respect of earlier assessment years. 
 It is not in dispute that the earlier orders of the ITAT allowing the 
 aforesaid expenditure as revenue expenditure had become final. 
 In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that no question of law 
 arises for consideration and dismiss these appeals accordingly. 
.
 A.K. SIKRI, J. 
.
.
.
 SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. 
 November 30, 2009 
 nsk 
.