AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.

1. This is an appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal setting aside the orders of the CIT (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer (for short, ‘the AO'). The addition made of royalty paid for the use of the brand name ‘phoneytune.com' to one Tarun Mohan, a director of the assessee, was deleted. The licence fee paid to M/s Phonographic Performance Ltd. was held to be revenue expenditure by the Tribunal.

2. The matter pertains to the assessment year 2009-10.

3. According to the appellant, the following substantial questions of law arise in this appeal :-

(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ‘royalty' payment would be allowable as business expenditure, where the same has not been exclusively and wholly incurred for business purposes?

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of the Tribunal is not perverse in holding that the transaction was not a colorable devise to reduce the tax liability of the company in which the Managing Director was none other than the beneficiary Proprietor of royalty particularly when no evidence of any patented product in possession