Incomplete statement of case in income-tax reference justifies remand for rehearing with properly framed questions of law.

Where a statement of case in an income-tax reference is incomplete or frames the question in a way that does not fairly present the real controversy, the record is insufficient for proper judicial review. The proper course is remand for rehearing, with the aggrieved party at liberty to move by notice of motion seeking fuller statements of fact and properly framed questions of law. The court emphasised that the reference must disclose the material facts and the genuine issue in dispute, including whether the finding rests on no evidence or is perverse, so that the matter can be considered on a complete and accurate basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's statement of case was incomplete and whether the matter should be remanded to the High Court for rehearing along with a notice of motion seeking fuller statements of fact and proper questions of law.

Analysis: The Tribunal's reference framed the question in a manner suggestive of the answer and did not set out the real controversy as to whether there was no evidence, or whether the finding was perverse. The statement of case also omitted material particulars about the work done by the solicitors, leaving the record insufficient to test the Tribunal's conclusion. In such a situation, the proper course was for the aggrieved party to move the court by notice of motion so that the completeness of the statement and the framing of the questions could be considered together.

Conclusion: The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded to the High Court for rehearing with liberty to bring a notice of motion at the same time.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statement of case under the income-tax reference procedure is incomplete or the framed question does not fairly present the real controversy, the proper course is remand for rehearing after considering a notice of motion seeking additional facts or properly framed questions of law.

---