- (1.) The above two references under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are by the Commissioner Income Tax, Allahabad referring identical questions for opinion of this Court. Since the assessee -respondent is the same and facts are common except that the Income Tax Reference No. 44 of 1987 is for the assessment year 1980-81 and Income Tax Reference No. 45 of 1987 is for the assessment year 1979-80 and therefore, both of these are being decided by the common judgement.
(2.) The Income Tax Reference No. 44 of 1987 is being treated as leading case. The questions of law which have been referred for opinion of this court are as follows :- (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that incurring of expenditure through M/s. Dey's Medical Stores Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. Calcutta, amounted to the maintenance of any office for the purpose of advertisement, publicity and sales promotion within the meaning of section 37(3B)(iv) of the I.T. Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that expenditure of Rs.23,60,574/- was incurred on the maintenance of any office for the purposes of advertisement, publicity, sales promotion within the meaning of section 37(3B)(iv) of the I.T. Act, 1961? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that no part of the expenditure of Rs.23,60,574/- could be disallowed u/s. 37(2A) as the amount of this expenditure qualified for exemption in terms of clause (iv) of section 37(3B) of the I.T. Act. 1961?
(3.) We have heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K. Upadhyay, senior counsel alongwith Sri Ritvik Upadhyay for the assessee.;