Reference to High Court cannot be refused where tax questions are governed by precedent or remain open on depreciation treatment.

A proposed reference on deduction from sale of eggs and birds under sections 80HH and 80-I was directed to be referred because the issue was already governed by an earlier decision and the Tribunal could not refuse reference on that basis. The second question, whether poultry sheds qualify as plant for higher depreciation, was also directed to be referred because it was not shown to be covered by the earlier precedent. The Supreme Court set aside the order refusing reference and required the Tribunal to refer both questions to the High Court for determination in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the question regarding deduction on income from sale of eggs and birds under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be referred to the High Court. (ii) Whether the question regarding treatment of poultry sheds as plant for higher depreciation should be referred to the High Court.

Issue (i): Whether the question regarding deduction on income from sale of eggs and birds under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be referred to the High Court.

Analysis: The question was already covered by an earlier decision of the Court on the same legal issue, so the Revenue's proposed reference on that point could not be refused on the ground that the issue was concluded.

Conclusion: The question was directed to be referred to the High Court, with the legal position to be answered in accordance with the earlier decision.

Issue (ii): Whether the question regarding treatment of poultry sheds as plant for higher depreciation should be referred to the High Court.

Analysis: The second question was not shown to be covered by the earlier decision and therefore required consideration by the High Court.

Conclusion: The question was directed to be referred to the High Court for answer.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the order refusing reference was set aside, resulting in a direction to the Tribunal to refer both questions to the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a proposed reference raises questions requiring legal consideration, the Tribunal cannot refuse reference merely because one issue is already governed by precedent; the High Court must be enabled to answer the referred questions in accordance with the applicable law.

---