(1.) IN pursuance of the direction of this Court in TC Petn. No. 454 of 1996, the Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law under S. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, in relation to the asst. yr. 1984-85
(2.) MRS . Pushya Sitharaman, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue fairly submitted that the issue raised in the question of law is covered against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in CIT vs. O.R.M.S.S.S. Sevugan Chettiar (2000) 241 ITR 662 (Mad), which followed an earlier decision of this Court in CIT vs. VR. S.R.M Firm (1994) 120 CTR (Mad) 427 : (1994) 208 ITR 400 (Mad).