1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.155 OF 1996 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-IV, Bombay .. Applicant. V/s. M/s.Mahindra Ugine Steel Co.Ltd... Respondent. Mr.R.V. Desai, senior counsel with Mr.A.S. Rao for the applicant. Mr.A.P. Sathe 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 : 7TH MARCH, 2005. DATED : 7TH MARCH, 2005. DATED : 7TH MARCH, 2005. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the respondent. The question of law referred to, reads as under : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directing the assessing officer to allow in full initial contribution paid by the assessee to the superannuation fund ? 2. The learned counsel for the applicant fairly states that the issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s. CIT V/s. CIT V/s. Sirpur Paper Mills [237 ITR 41]. Sirpur Paper Mills [237 ITR 41]. Sirpur Paper Mills [237 ITR 41]. 3. In view thereof, the question is answered in affirmative in favour of the assessee against the revenue. (S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.) 2 (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)