https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22122 The Tribunal could not sustain allocation of donations to the agricultural section for restricting relief under section 88 because the governing Supreme Court precedent and CBDT circulars required a different treatment, so the assessee succeeded on that point. The Tribunal also could not disallow part of the head office advertisement expenditure on souvenirs by treating it as charity, because the issue was covered by the assessee's earlier decision and the expenditure treatment followed that position, so the disallowance was unjustified. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee on the two questions decided, while the remaining question was left open for fresh consideration on the limited aspect indicated. en-us Fri, 15 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2009 12:07:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22122 The Tribunal could not sustain allocation of donations to the agricultural section for restricting relief under section 88 because the governing Supreme Court precedent and CBDT circulars required a different treatment, so the assessee succeeded on that point. The Tribunal also could not disallow part of the head office advertisement expenditure on souvenirs by treating it as charity, because the issue was covered by the assessee's earlier decision and the expenditure treatment followed that position, so the disallowance was unjustified. The reference was answered in favour of the assessee on the two questions decided, while the remaining question was left open for fresh consideration on the limited aspect indicated. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22122