Income-tax reference fails when the underlying order is not appealable, leaving the tribunal without jurisdiction.

The reference was incompetent because the assessee's miscellaneous application for relief under Section 25(4) was not one contemplated by the Act, and no appeal lay from the order made on it under Section 30. In the absence of a competent appellate order under Section 33(4), the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to state a case for the Court. The preliminary objection was therefore accepted, and the merits of the claimed relief under Section 25(4) were not examined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference was competent when the order made on the assessee's miscellaneous application was not an order appealable under the Act.

Analysis: The assessee's application for relief under Section 25(4) was not one contemplated by any provision of the Act. No appeal lay from the order passed on such an application under Section 30, and therefore no competent appeal could lie to the Appellate Tribunal from the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In the absence of a competent order of the Tribunal under Section 33(4), the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to state a case for the Court's determination. The Court therefore accepted the preliminary objection and did not go into the merits of the claimed relief under Section 25(4).

Conclusion: The reference was incompetent and the question referred was not answered.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference under the income-tax appellate scheme cannot be entertained unless it arises from a competent appellate order passed in a matter appealable under the Act.

---