Referable questions of law cannot be refused merely because the Tribunal did not expressly deal with every issue raised.

A question of law raised before the Tribunal but not expressly dealt with is still treated as arising out of its order for reference purposes. On that basis, the High Court held that the Tribunal could not refuse reference merely because it had not separately addressed every point. The proposed reference issues concerning production of statutory declarations at the appellate stage, the applicable rate of tax under section 4B, and levy of tax on the purchase value of rice bran were all referable questions of law, and a reference was required on those issues.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the application for reference in respect of the questions of law relating to production of statutory declarations at the appellate stage, the applicable rate of tax under section 4B, and levy of tax on the purchase value of rice bran.

Analysis: The questions sought to be referred were not to be rejected merely because the Tribunal had not separately dealt with every point, since a question of law raised before the Tribunal but not dealt with is deemed to have been dealt with and can arise out of the order. The questions concerning tax liability, the applicable rate of tax, and the legal effect of statutory declarations at the appellate stage were therefore questions of law requiring determination by the Court on reference.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in refusing reference of the specified questions of law, and a reference had to be made on those issues.

Ratio Decidendi: A question of law raised before the Tribunal and not dealt with is treated as arising out of its order for the purpose of reference, and such referable legal questions cannot be declined on the ground that they were not expressly decided by the Tribunal.

---