AGK AGK AGK 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.305 OF 1998 The Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City - III, Bombay .. Applicant. V/s. M/s.Dai Ichi Karkaria Pvt.Ltd. .. Respondent. Mr.A.S. Rao for the applicant. Mr.P.J. Pardiwala i/b. Mulla & Mulla for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & CORAM : V.C. DAGA & CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 11TH OCTOBER, 2005. DATED : 11TH OCTOBER, 2005. DATED : 11TH OCTOBER, 2005. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. The Tribunal has referred the 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 while computing the disallowance in respect of remuneration paid to Director-employee, provisions of sec.40(c) are applicable and not sec.40A(5) of the I.T. Act ? 2. The above question has already been answered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Hico Products Pvt.Ltd. (No.1) [(1993) 201 CIT V/s. Hico Products Pvt.Ltd. (No.1) [(1993) 201 CIT V/s. Hico Products Pvt.Ltd. (No.1) [(1993) 201 I.T.R. 567 (Bom)] I.T.R. 567 (Bom)] I.T.R. 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 of Hico Products (P) Ltd. Reference, accordingly stands disposed of with no order as to costs. AGK AGK AGK 2 *********