B.P.Jeevan Reddy, C.J. - (1.) List has been revised. Counsel for the respondent not present.
(2.) Having regard to the fact that this court and other courts have dealt with similar questions, vide CIT v. Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. [1980] 121 ITR 747 (All), we direct the Tribunal to state question No. 1 under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act. Question No. 1, which is directed to be referred, reads as follows : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,29,328 made on account of cash assistance under Section 28(iv) disregarding the provisions of Section 2(24)(va) along with Section 10(3)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the Board's Circular No. 1690 dated February 11, 1986 ?"
(3.) It is agreed that question No. 2 is merely argumentative in nature and does not constitute an independent question.;