Section 80HH reference question of law cannot be refused merely because a similar reference is pending.

Interpretation of section 80HH raised a question of law fit for reference under section 256(2), and the Tribunal could not decline to refer it merely because a similar reference was already pending. The pendency of another reference did not answer the statutory obligation to state the case on the question sought to be referred. The court therefore directed that the reference be made with the statement of case, without examining the merits of the deduction computation issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in refusing to refer the question relating to computation of deduction under section 80HH on the ground that a similar question had already been referred and was pending decision.

Analysis: The application under section 256(2) concerned a question requiring interpretation of section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and therefore involved a question of law fit for reference. The pendency of a similar reference did not justify the Tribunal in declining to refer the question. Without entering into the merits of the computation issue, the Court held that the reference ought to be made along with the statement of case.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in refusing the reference, and it was directed to refer the question within four months.

---