IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.1006 OF 1998 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-I, Bombay .. Applicant. V/s. Ramesh Behl .. 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 provisions of section 37 (3D) and not provisions of section 37(3A) are appliable in connection with the expenditure on advertisement and in deleting the disallowance of Rs.59,550/- ? 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. S.M. Sagar [(2003) 261 ITR 271 (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. *********