( 1 ) THE respondents had filed WP No. 1232 (W) of 1997 challenging the vires of Circular No, 600, dt. 23rd May, 1991, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) so far as it was inconsistent with and repugnant to Rule 8 of the IT Rules, 1962 (Rules) r/w Section 2 (1a) of the IT Act, 1961 (Act) in relation to deduction under Section 80hhc of the Act. By a judgment and order dt. 24th Sept. , 1998, the learned Single Judge was pleased to hold that the interpretation of CBDT in construing the provisions of Section 80hhc and Rule 8 through Circular No. 600, dt. 23rd May, 1991, was incorrect and accordingly a declaration was issued that the said circular was not attracted in the case of the petitioners.

( 2 ) THE Department had preferred APO No. 792 of 1999 and the State of West Bengal, which was not a party to the proceeding, sought leave to and preferred APOT No. 229 of 1999 against the said judgment. During the pendency of these appeals, Sub-section (4b) was inserted in Section 80hhc through Finance Act, 1999, w. e. f. 1st of April, 1992. Mr. P. K. Mullick, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Department-appellant in APO No, 792 of 1999 had point