Reference jurisdiction under income-tax law is confined to questions raised before or decided by the Tribunal

A question sought to be referred under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was not referable unless it had been raised before the Tribunal or decided by it. A new issue cannot be introduced for the first time at the reference stage, even if it is connected with the assessment dispute, because reference jurisdiction is confined to matters actually argued or determined by the Tribunal. The High Court was therefore justified in refusing to call for a statement of the case, and the assessee's appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question sought to be referred under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, which was neither raised before nor decided by the Tribunal, could be treated as a question arising out of the Tribunal's order and referred to the High Court.

Analysis: The right to obtain a reference is confined to questions that were raised before the Tribunal or were decided by it. A new question, not put in issue before the Tribunal, cannot be introduced for the first time in proceedings under section 66(2). The fact that a different aspect of the dispute may be related to the assessment controversy does not make an unraised question referable. The principle applied is that the reference jurisdiction cannot be used to enlarge the scope of the Tribunal's order beyond what was actually argued or determined.

Conclusion: The question was not referable under section 66(2), and the High Court was right in refusing to call for a statement of the case. The assessee's appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference under section 66(2) lies only on a question that was raised before or decided by the Tribunal; a new question cannot be introduced at the stage of reference.

---