- (1.) In these appeals the question that we are concerned with reads thus: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the entire initial contribution made to the superannuation fund is allowable deduction - The High Court declined to call for its reference and the Revenue is in appeal. The High Court relied upon its earlier judgment in the case of, Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products Ltd., 172 ITR 762 : (1988 Tax LR 1647). The Revenue had filed a Special Leave Petition against this judgment but it was dismissed on the ground of undue delay.
(2.) The facts of these appeals are similar. The facts now set out are of Civil Appeal No. 2398 of 1994.
(3.) The assessee had in the relevant Assessment Year (A.Y. 1981-82) made a contribution to an approved superannuation fund. For the current year the amount contributed was Rs. 2,70,911/- and for the past five years it was an aggregated amount of Rs. 2,14,785/- calculated on the basis of 25% of the employees dues on account of past service. The Income-tax Officer allowed the deduction only to the extent of 80% of the aggregate contribution and spread it out over a period of five years. For so doing, he relied upon a notification dated 21-10-1965 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The assessee appealed and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the deduction in full. The order of the C.I.T. (Appeals) was upheld by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The application of the Revenue to refer the question aforestated to the High Court for consideration was rejected both by the Tribunal, under Section 256(1), and by the High Court, under Section 256(2). The High Court, as aforestated, followed its decision in Hyderabad Asbestos Cement Products Limited, (1988 Tax LR 1647).;