Judgment : ABDUL HADI J. This tax case by the assessee is under section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and relates to the assessment year 1981-82. The question referred to us is as follows "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that computation of disallowance under rule 6D should not be restricted to the expenditure incurred during the period of travel alone ? " But the question is not happily worded. After the word" incurred "in the abovesaid question, the expression" for travel alone"must be there, and not" during the period of travel alone" * This is so because, the contention of learned counsel for the assessee is that hotel expenses during travel would not come under rule 6D at all, and only travel expenses would be covered under rule 6D There is absolutely no merit in the abovesaid contention. Not only the above referred to rule 6D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, but the enactment itself in section 37(3) specifically says that notwithstanding section 37(1) with reference to expenditure incurred in connection with "travelling by an employee (of the assessee) or any other person (including hotel expenses or allowances paid in connection with such travelling)" shall be allowed only to the extent prescribed. The abovesaid prescription is there in the abovesaid rule 6D, which is also worded in the same way In the above circumstances, learned counsel for the assessee could not argue anything seriously contra. Accordingly, the question, as we have formulated above, is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue. No costs.