Board circulars governed pending tax appeals, so no referable question of law arose on the Commissioner's reference request.

Amortization was allowed on the basis of circulars in force at the start of the assessment year, and a later circular did not displace the governing circular that specifically required pending appellate matters to be completed under its guidelines. The appellate authority and the Tribunal applied that operative circular, so the Commissioner's request for reference was inconsistent with the Board's own instructions and did not raise a referable question of law. The reference application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law arose for reference at the instance of the Commissioner in circumstances where the assessment and the departmental appeal had been disposed of in accordance with the Board's circulars.

Analysis: The assessee's amortization had been allowed on the basis of circulars in force at the beginning of the assessment year. A later circular issued in 1972 altered the position, but another circular in force during the pendency of the reassessment and appeal specifically directed that pending appellate matters should be completed in accordance with its guidelines. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner acted on that circular, and the Tribunal upheld that course. In these circumstances, the reference sought by the Commissioner was inconsistent with the Board's own view and did not disclose a referable question of law.

Conclusion: No question of law arose for reference, and the reference application was rightly rejected.

---