Purely factual reference questions were not admitted, while a related share-capital credit issue was sent back for limited reassessment.

Questions that turned purely on factual findings were held not to give rise to referable questions and were not admitted for consideration. A limited remand was considered appropriate on the unexplained credit against share capital issue because the same entry was already under examination in the managing director's assessment, and that connected matter had also been remitted. The company's reassessment was therefore directed to proceed along with the related assessment, leaving the merits open for fresh examination by the assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether questions Nos. 2 to 7 raised in the reference application were liable to be admitted for consideration; (ii) Whether the deletion of the alleged unexplained credit against share capital required a limited remand for reassessment.

Issue (i): Whether questions Nos. 2 to 7 raised in the reference application were liable to be admitted for consideration.

Analysis: The questions were examined with reference to the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer and the Tribunal and were found to turn purely on facts.

Conclusion: Questions Nos. 2 to 7 were rejected as not giving rise to referable questions and the appeal was not admitted on those proposed questions.

Issue (ii): Whether the deletion of the alleged unexplained credit against share capital required a limited remand for reassessment.

Analysis: The alleged unexplained credit against share capital was already under consideration in the assessment of the managing director, and the Tribunal had remanded that connected matter to the Assessing Officer. In that situation, a limited reassessment of the company on the same credit entry was considered appropriate.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded for the limited purpose of reassessing the company along with the connected assessment of the managing director on the alleged unexplained credit against share capital.

Final Conclusion: The decision declined to entertain the factual questions but ordered a limited remand on the share-capital credit issue, leaving the merits open for fresh consideration by the assessing authority.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference on questions that are purely factual is not admissible, while a connected credit issue may be sent back for limited reassessment where the same transaction is under examination in a related assessment.

---