ORDER : M.R. Shah, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned Order dated 7th July 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as, "the Tribunal"] passed in I.T.A No. 1688/Ahd/2011 for A.Y 1996-97, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed questions of law: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Royalty expenses of Rs. 1,12,12,352/- under Section 35AB of the Act made by the Assessing Officer?" 2. Heard Shri M.R Bhatt, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-Revenue. 3. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned ITAT, it appears that the learned Tribunal has deleted the disallowance of Royalty expenses of Rs. 1,12,12,352/- under Section 35AB of the Act made by the Assessing Officer, relying upon and considering its earlier order in the case of very assessee, but for earlier assessment year. 4. It is reported that against the decision of learned Tribunal on the very issue and in the case of very assessee, but with respect to earlier assessment year, an appeal was preferred by the Revenue before this Court and the Division Bench had not admitted the appeal qua the aforesaid issue. Meaning thereby, the order passed by the learned Tribunal in the case of very assessee on the very issue, but with respect to earlier assessment year, has been accepted by the Division Bench of this Court and/or the same has not been upset by the Division Bench of this Court. 5. In view of the above, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error of law. 6. No question of law arises in the present Tax Appeal. Hence, the present Tax Appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.