No question of law in penalty reference where concealment turned on accepted facts, not legal principle.

The penalty dispute turned on the Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's explanation that the amount had been assessed in its hands because of an arrangement with an allied concern. The finding on concealment was based on those accepted facts rather than on any legal principle, so no question of law arose from the Tribunal's order for a reference under section 66(2). Although the High Court should have given reasons when dismissing the application, the record still disclosed no referable legal issue, and the refusal to require a reference was therefore justified in substance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order in the penalty matter gave rise to any question of law so as to justify a reference under section 66(2).

Analysis: The dispute turned on the Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's explanation that the amount had been assessed in its hands because of an arrangement with an allied concern. The conclusion as to concealment depended on the facts accepted by the Tribunal and not on any legal principle. Although the High Court ought to have stated reasons for dismissing the application, the record disclosed no legal question arising from the Tribunal's order.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's order, and the refusal to require a reference was in substance.

---