Reference jurisdiction requires a question to have been raised or decided by the Tribunal, not merely pleaded in grounds.

The reference jurisdiction under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act is narrower than appellate or revisional jurisdiction: a question of law arises out of a Tribunal order only if it was raised before the Tribunal or actually dealt with by it. A point merely included in the grounds of appeal or revision does not, by itself, establish that it was pressed before the Tribunal. If the Tribunal's order neither notices nor adjudicates the point, the normal presumption is that it was not raised, although that presumption may be rebutted by proof that it was urged and omitted from consideration. The contrary approach was disapproved and the earlier supporting decision overruled.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law, not expressly adjudicated upon by the Tribunal and not shown to have been pressed before it, can be presumed to arise out of the Tribunal's order merely because it was taken in the grounds of appeal or revision.

Analysis: The reference jurisdiction under section 22(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 is narrower than appellate or revisional jurisdiction. A question of law arises out of the Tribunal's order only if it was raised before the Tribunal or was actually dealt with by it. Merely including a point in the grounds of appeal or revision does not, by itself, establish that the point was pressed before the Tribunal. Where a question is neither noticed nor adjudicated in the Tribunal's order, the normal presumption is that it was not raised, though that presumption is rebuttable by proof that the point was in fact urged and omitted from consideration. The contrary view was disapproved, and the earlier decision following that approach was overruled.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the negative. A point merely taken in the grounds of appeal or revision does not, without more, arise out of the Tribunal's order.

---