Reference on statutory classification of tubular trusses is a question of law and cannot be refused without binding precedent.

A reference under section 42(1) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act could not be refused merely because the Tribunal had adopted what it considered the correct view of law, unless the issue was already directly covered by binding High Court or Supreme Court authority. The question whether tubular trusses fell within a statutory entry under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act was itself a question of law fit for reference, while the first proposed question was only argumentative. The Tribunal was therefore directed to refer the formulated question to the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application for reference under section 42(1) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 could be refused on the ground that the Tribunal had correctly interpreted the law, and whether the question whether tubular trusses were covered by section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act was a question of law requiring reference.

Analysis: The refusal to make a reference could not rest merely on the view that the Tribunal had correctly interpreted the law, unless the matter was already directly covered by a decision of the Court or the Supreme Court. The nature of the controversy whether the goods fell within a particular statutory entry was itself a question of law fit for reference. Of the two questions proposed, only the second question truly arose for decision, the first being only argumentative in character.

Conclusion: The application for reference could not be rejected on the stated ground, and the Tribunal was directed to refer the formulated question to the Court.

---