Binding Supreme Court precedent made a tax reference on set-off of a wife's loss unnecessary and academic.

A reference under Section 256(1) was held unnecessary because the question whether the wife's loss could be set off against the assessee's income under Section 64(1)(i), read with Explanation 2, had already been answered by the Supreme Court in an identical controversy. The Tribunal treated the point as covered by binding precedent, so the proposed reference had become purely academic and no useful purpose would be served by seeking a fresh opinion. The reference application was dismissed, and the issue stood concluded in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was called for on the question of set-off of the wife's loss against the assessee's income under Section 64(1)(i), in view of Explanation 2 to Section 64 and the existing Supreme Court decision on the same point.

Analysis: The question sought to be referred had already been concluded by the Supreme Court in an identical controversy, and the Tribunal treated the issue as covered by binding authority. Once the controversy stood answered by the Supreme Court, no useful purpose remained in making a reference on a matter that had become purely academic.

Conclusion: No reference was called for, and the reference application was dismissed. The issue stood concluded in favour of the assessee.

---