Reference under income-tax law refused where Tribunal's findings were purely factual and no question of law arose.

A reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 was held unwarranted because the Tribunal's order rested on factual findings. The Tribunal had set aside the assessment after finding no evidence that the impugned transaction was effected by the assessees and directed the Income-tax Officer to identify the person actually responsible. That appraisal of evidence was treated as a pure question of fact, so no referable question of law arose. The refusal to state a case was therefore maintained, and the Tribunal's factual conclusions were left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether any question of law arose from the Tribunal's order so as to justify a reference under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.

Analysis: The Tribunal had set aside the assessment and recorded a finding that there was no evidence to show that the impugned transaction had been effected by the assessees, while directing the Income-tax Officer to ascertain the person actually responsible and assess that person. The refusal to state a case was upheld because the controversy turned on the Tribunal's appraisal of evidence and its factual conclusion as to the absence of proof linking the assessees to the sale. Such findings were treated as essentially factual and not giving rise to a referable question of law.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's order. The refusal to call for a statement of case was /maintained against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the dismissal of the request for reference was sustained, leaving the Tribunal's factual findings undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference under the income-tax law is not warranted where the Tribunal's decision rests on findings of fact and no legal question emerges from those findings.

---