Conflicting High Court views on separate assessments kept the question of law open, justifying reference to the court.

A statable question of law arose on whether separate assessments were required for two periods and on the applicability of section 187(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Although earlier Full Bench decisions of the same High Court had addressed the issues, a contrary Full Bench view of another High Court created a conflict, and the Supreme Court had not resolved it. In that situation, the questions could not be treated as concluded for reference purposes. The application for reference was allowed, and the Tribunal was directed to state the case and refer the questions for the court's opinion.

---

---

Issues: Whether a statable question of law arose from the Tribunal's appellate order for reference on the questions relating to separate assessments for two periods and the applicability of section 187(2)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The questions had been answered by earlier Full Bench decisions of the same court, but a contrary Full Bench view of another High Court existed and no decision of the Supreme Court had settled the conflict. In that situation, the questions could not be said to be concluded so as to exclude a reference.

Conclusion: A statable question of law arose, and the application for reference was allowed; the Tribunal was directed to state the case and refer the questions for the opinion of the court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where there is a conflict of opinion between High Courts on a question of law and the point is not settled by the Supreme Court, the existence of a statable question of law cannot be denied for the purpose of reference.

---