IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 214 OF 1995 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay .. Applicant V/s. M/s. Hindustan Thompson Associates Ltd., Bombay - 1. .. Respondent Mr. R.V. Desai with Ms. S.V. Bharucha and Mr. R. Ashokan for the Applicant None present for the Respondent CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM : S. RADHAKRISHNAN & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 22.02.2005 DATED : 22.02.2005 DATED : 22.02.2005 P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant. The question referred to reads as under:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the disallowance under Rule 6-D of the Income-tax Rules should be worked out on the total expenditure incurred by each employee for the year rather than an expenditure incurred per each trip" 2. In view of the judgment in C.I.T. v. Auro India C.I.T. v. Auro India C.I.T. v. Auro India Ltd. 229 ITR 325 (Bom.) Ltd. 229 ITR 325 (Bom.) Ltd. 229 ITR 325 (Bom.), the question is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. (S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)