Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to have questions referred under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, when the proposed questions either rested on a mistaken factual premise or did not arise from the Tribunal's order.
Analysis: The application sought reference of three questions, but only two were pressed. The first proposed question proceeded on an incorrect assumption that the Tribunal had upheld rejection of the section 146 application merely because the return was not filed before the hearing; in fact, the Tribunal had held that no satisfactory explanation was given for not filing the return before assessment was made. The second proposed question was held not to arise from the Tribunal's order and, in any event, section 139(4) had no application because the return was filed only after the assessment had already been completed.
Conclusion: The questions were not fit to be referred under section 256(2), and the application was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: A question cannot be directed to be referred under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 unless it arises from the Tribunal's order and is founded on the correct factual premise; a provision inapplicable to the admitted facts cannot sustain a reference.