IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.819 OF 1998 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City VI, Bombay .. Applicant. V/s. Hindustan Door Oliver Ltd. Bombay .. Respondent. Mr.Parag Vyas with Mr.Ashok Kotangale & Mr.A.S. Rao for the applicant. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 18TH OCTOBER, 2005. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. The Tribunal has referred following question for the opinion of this Court reading as under :- Whether in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the disallowance in respect of salary and perquisites to employee director should be made as per the provisions of section 40(c) and not those of section 40A(5)? 2. The learned counsel for the applicant-revenue fairly submits that the above question has already been answered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Hico Products P. Ltd. (No.1) [(1993) 201 ITR 567 (Bom)] in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. In this view of the matter, question stands answered in affirmative for the reasons stated in the case cited supra. Reference, accordingly stands disposed of with no order as to costs. *********