Section 66(3) reference must rest on the same questions of law raised before the Commissioner; new points cannot be introduced in the High Court.

An application under section 66(3) had to proceed on the same questions of law that were placed before the Commissioner when he refused to state a case. The assessee could not substitute new or different legal questions at the High Court stage, because that would bypass the Commissioner's prior consideration and make the statutory reference process ineffective. The application on the substituted points was therefore not maintainable and was dismissed, with the preliminary objection succeeding.

---

---

Issues: Whether an assessee, on an application under section 66(3), could substitute different questions of law before the High Court from those originally placed before the Commissioner for consideration.

Analysis: Section 66(3) contemplates that the Commissioner is to state a case on the question or questions of law that were before him when he refused to state the case. Allowing the assessee to shift to different legal points at the stage of the High Court would defeat the prior consideration by the Commissioner and render that stage ineffective.

Conclusion: The application was not maintainable on the substituted points of law and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The assessee could not alter the basis of the reference at the High Court stage, and the preliminary objection succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: An application under section 66(3) must proceed on the same questions of law that were placed before the Commissioner; substituted or entirely different questions cannot be raised for the first time in the High Court.

---