Reference under tax law refused where proposed issues were factual or settled by clear statutory and constitutional text.

A reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not required where the proposed question is factual or already answered by clear statutory and constitutional text. The first proposed issue concerning exemption under section 10(26) was treated as a question of fact arising from the Tribunal's appreciation of the record, so no reference was called for. The second issue on the effect of paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule was considered settled by the wording of section 10(26) read with the constitutional provisions, and the Tribunal followed its earlier rejection of similar reference applications.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference applications under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be accepted on the proposed questions relating to exemption under section 10(26) and the effect of paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The questions proposed by the Revenue were not found to warrant reference. The first question was treated as one of fact arising from the Tribunal's appreciation of the record. The second question was considered to be answered by the clear language of section 10(26) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with the relevant constitutional provisions. In view of the earlier rejection of similar reference applications, the same approach was applied here.

Conclusion: The reference applications were rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not called for where the proposed question is factual or is already answered by the clear statutory and constitutional text.

---