THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN PER THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO R.C.NO.67 OF 1997 DT.16.06.2010 Between: V.V.V.Satyanarayana, Bhadrachalam. ……..Applicant Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, A.P.II, Hyderabad ……..Respondent. O R D E R: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard Sri S.R.Ashok and V.R.Badri, learned Standing Counsels appearing for the respondent. None appeared for the applicant. The questions referred by the Tribunal read as: (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in holding that the expenditure claimed from the incentive bonus is not allowable as a deduction under Section 10(14) of the I.T.Act?, (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in holding no expenditure other than the allowance under Section 16(i) is allowable from the income received by the assessee? and (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal is justified in restricting the allowance of additional conveyance allowance to the extent certified by the employer as against the entire sum spent by he assessee? Now, it is reported by the learned standing counsels that the issue involved in this Referred Case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. B. CHINNAIAH AND OTHERS[1], which was answered in favour of the Revenue. In view of the aforesaid decision, this Referred Case is answered. No order as to costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO J., ________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN J., Dt.16.06.2010 Rns [1] ITR VOL.214, PAGE 368