Reference jurisdiction under the Income-tax Act cannot be used to raise belated objections to jurisdiction and respondent substitution.

A question of law can arise from an appellate order even if it was not expressly argued before the Tribunal, so the power to require a reference under the Income-tax Act is not limited to issues formally pressed in appeal. However, where the proposed reference concerns mixed questions of fact and law, and the Department had already accepted notice and contested the appeals on merits without timely objection, belated challenges on jurisdiction and substitution of respondents should not be entertained in reference proceedings. On that basis, the applications were dismissed and the Tribunal was not required to state a case or refer the questions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal should be required to state a case and refer questions that were not raised or argued in the appeals, including objections to jurisdiction and substitution of respondents.

Analysis: A question of law may arise out of an order even if it was not expressly discussed in the appellate order. The power to require a reference under the Income-tax Act is therefore not confined to points formally argued before the Tribunal. However, the nature of the questions here involved mixed questions of fact and law, and the Department had accepted notice and participated in the appeals on the merits without raising the objections at the appropriate stage. In those circumstances, the belated attempt to raise jurisdictional and respondent-substitution objections in reference proceedings was not one that should be entertained.

Conclusion: The applications were rightly dismissed, and the Tribunal was not required to state a case or refer the questions.

---