K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.518 OF 1997 M/s.Procter & Gamble India Ltd., ) (previously known as Richardson ) Hindustan Ltd.) ‘Tieciond, Dr.E. ) Moses Road, Bombay-11 )..Applicant V/s. The Commissioner of Income-tax ) Bombay City-V, Bombay ) Bombay-400 011 )..Respondent ---- Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the respondent. Mr.J.D.Mistry with Ms.Payal Parikh, Ms.Nikita Kadam i/by M & M Legal Venture for the applicant. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 18.3.2009. Judgment :- (Per : R.S.Mohite,J) 1. The question of law referred to this Court under Section 156(1) of the Income-tax Act is as under :- 1. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the assessee-company for weighted deduction under section 35C on :- (a) various expenses incurred on provision of Distillation services ; (b) Expenses on transportation services provided to farmers ; (c) Various expenses incurred under the head Mentha Research Centre and Mentha Research Administrative Centre including expenditure on Mentha Administration Services ; (d) Expenses on distillation services including depreciation on assets used for distillation : 2 : services ; (e) Depreciation on assets used for Mentha Research Centre. 2. In our view question nos.1(a), 1(c), 1(d) and 1(e) have been answered in the affirmative and against the assessee in view of the judgment and order passed in Income Tax Reference No.315 of 1988 and Income Tax Reference No.3 of 1998 which concern the same assessee and arise from a similar background of facts. In the circumstances, the aforesaid questions are answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. 3. In so far as question no.1(b) is concerned, the same is covered by a judgment and order dated 18.3.2009 passed in Income Tax Reference No.3 of 1998 wherein we have answered the same in the affirmative. The question is therefore, answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. 4. In view of the answers given above, the reference is disposed off with no orders as to costs. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)