1 36 itxa 2064.09.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION k INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2064 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-7 .. Appellant. Vs. M/s Rediffusion Dentsu Young & Rubicam Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr. Jitendra Jain for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 2ND SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1 Two questions of law raised by the Revenue in this Appeal which read thus: 1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in remitting the issue regarding expenses of Rs.16,77,129/- on up-gradation of computer software to the file of A.O. following the decision of the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Amway India Enterprises reported in 111 ITD 112 without giving clear finding? 2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in allowing 2 36 itxa 2064.09.doc payment of Rs.3,93,228/- towards employees’ contribution to provident fund made after due date? 2 As regard the first question is concerned, since the Tribunal has remitted the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, for fresh consideration, we do not see any reason to entertain the first question. 3 As regard to the second question is concerned, counsel for the parties state that the second question is answered against the Revenue by the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. WMI Cranes Ltd. reported in (2010) 326 ITR 0523. Therefore, the second question cannot be entertained. 4 Appeal is dismissed accordingly with no order as to costs. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (K.K. TATED, J.)