Misdescription in a tax reference application is a curable defect when the competent authority acted in substance.

A reference application is not treated as incompetent merely because it is misdescribed as a different tax matter or filed in the wrong form, where the same competent officer in substance instituted the proceeding and the statement of facts was properly signed. The defect in the heading, section reference and form is an inadvertent procedural mistake, not a jurisdictional nullity, and may be cured under the applicable rules permitting amendment or return of defective memoranda, read with the saving provision protecting proceedings from invalidation by mere defects. Authorities on absence of competence or jurisdiction are distinguishable on their facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference application was incompetent because it was signed and headed as a Commissioner of Income-tax matter instead of a Gift-tax matter and was filed in the wrong form, or whether these defects were curable.

Analysis: The application was otherwise made by the same officer who held both offices, and the statement of facts was signed in the correct capacity. The defect in the heading, the section cited, and the form used was treated as an inadvertent mistake rather than a jurisdictional nullity. The applicable procedural rules allowed defective memoranda to be rejected or returned for amendment, and the statutory saving provision was read as protecting proceedings from being invalidated by mere mistakes or defects. The authorities relied on by the assessee were distinguished because they involved absence of competent party, want of jurisdiction, or different factual settings. The defect in the present application was held to be rectifiable.

Conclusion: The preliminary objection was rejected and the revenue was directed to file a proper amended application within the time granted.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference application is not rendered incompetent by a misdescription of the officer or by use of the wrong form where the competent authority has in substance instituted the proceeding and the defect is capable of amendment under the governing procedural rules and saving provision.

---