Mandi fee treated as a service fee, not tax, so no referable question of law arose under income-tax provisions.

Mandi fee and Nirashrit Shulk were treated as fees for services rendered by the mandi to traders and users of the facility, rather than as tax or duty merely because payment was compulsory. On that basis, the issue under section 43B did not turn on a legal characterization that generated a referable question of law. The point had already been considered by the appellate authorities and the Tribunal, and the proposed reference was also unsupported because the issue was not shown to have been raised before the Tribunal. No referable question of law arose, so the request to direct a reference was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether mandi fee and Nirashrit Shulk were to be treated as tax or duty for the purpose of section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether any referable question of law arose for directing a reference under section 256(2).

Analysis: The levy was treated as a fee paid for services rendered by the mandi to traders and users of the facility, and not as a tax merely because payment was compulsory. The issue had already been dealt with by the appellate authorities and the Tribunal, and the point sought to be raised was not shown to have been raised before the Tribunal. The conclusion that the mandi fee was a fee and not a tax was held to be essentially factual, not giving rise to a question of law.

Conclusion: No referable question of law arose, and the request to direct the Tribunal to make a reference was rejected.

---