Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the High Court should answer a question of law referred by the Tribunal under Section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 when the party at whose instance the reference was made states it is not interested in the reference being answered.
Analysis: The Court reviewed authorities establishing that although a reference is made by the Tribunal, the obligation to decide a question of law arises upon a hearing of the case. Where the party who caused the reference either fails to appear, appears but declines to prosecute the reference, or otherwise shows no interest in having the question answered, the preliminary condition of a hearing is not satisfied and the High Court is not bound to answer the question. The Court considered precedent holding that withdrawal as of right is not available to the party who caused the reference, but that the High Court may decline to answer the reference when there is no hearing or the parties are not interested. Applying these principles to the facts, the applicant/appellant before the Tribunal informed the Court that it was no longer interested in pursuing the reference and the revenue likewise showed no interest.
Conclusion: The Court declined to answer the question(s) referred by the Tribunal and disposed of the references, keeping the questions of law open for decision in an appropriate case.