T.D Sugla, J.:— The only question of law raised in this reference at the instance of the Revenue is:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the cash payments by the assessee to its employees towards house rent allowance in accordance with the service agreement would fall within the purview of the expression ‘perquisite’ contained in section 40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?”
2. Counsel are agreed that in view of this court's decision in the case of CIT v. Indokem Pvt. Ltd., [1981] 132 ITR 125, which was followed in the case of Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay City-Iii, Bombay v. Mercantile Bank Ltd., [1988] 169 ITR 44 (Bom), the question is required to be answered in the negative and in favour of the asses-see.
3. The question is accordingly so answered. No order as to costs.