1. ' SAEEDUZZAMAN SIDDIQUI, J.--The following two questions have been referred to us for decision under section 66 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1922.
2. "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs,3,62, 650 claimed as Management Expenses being in excess and in contravention of the maximum prescribed in this behalf under Rule 40 of the Insurance Rules were admissible."
3. "(2) Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case the sum of Rs,94,474 for the assessm ent year 1972-73 claimed as extra Reserve for an unexpired Risk in Fire, Marine and Miscellaneous account, were liable to be allowed having been Incurred beyond the permissible limit of 40 per cent under the Insurance Act and Rules and or deductible as laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business under Section 10 (2) (xvi) of the Income Tax Act."
4. ' Mr. Shaikh Haider has invited our attention to the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Karachi v. Alfa Insurance Company PLD 1981 SC 293 which covered the answer to question No,1 mentioned above. We accordingly decide question No,1 in the affirmative.
5. ' The second question mentioned above is also covered by the decisions reported as Commissioner of Income Tax v. New Jubilee Insurance Company PLD 1982 Kar 684 and Eastern Federal Union Company Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1980 PTD 73. We agree with the decision cited above and accordingly answer question No,2 also in the affirmative. However, we may mention here that against the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. New Jubilee Insurance Company, the department has gone in appeal before the Supreme Court which is presently pending in the Supreme Court as stated by Mr. Shaikh Hyder.