Ratnam, J.:— In this tax case reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the Income-tax Officer's disallowanceof Rs. 40,910 under section 40(a)(v) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, out ofthe commission payment of Rs. 13,310 for the assessment year 1971-72?”
2. In the course of the proceedings before the Tribunal, the assesseerelied upon a decision of the Tribunal in the case of Manjushree Plantations Ltd., Nilgiris (I.T.A Nos. 1978 to 1981.MDS/1972-73), dealingwith an identical question. That formed the subject-matter of a reference before this court in the decision in CIT v. Manjushree Plantations Ltd.[1980] 125 ITR 150 according to which, in order to term a payment a”perquisite”, it had to be a payment other than a cash payment, inpursuance of a contract of service.
3. In this case also, it has been foundthat the payments were cash payments and as per the decision referredto earlier, such payments could not constitute “perquisites” and the Tribunal was, therefore, right in holding that the Income-tax Officer was in error in disallowing the sum of Rs. 40,910. We answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. No costs.