Reference jurisdiction cannot introduce a new question of law never raised before the Tribunal.

A question of law not raised before the Tribunal and not decided in its order cannot be introduced for the first time in reference proceedings. The reference jurisdiction cannot be used to fill omissions in the adjudication record or to rely on provisions never pleaded or considered earlier. Applying that principle, the reference application was held not maintainable and was rejected because the import policy and Import (Control) Order points had not been canvassed before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether a reference application could be maintained on a question of law based on provisions that were neither raised before nor considered by the adjudicating authority or the Tribunal.

Analysis: The reference sought to introduce reliance on provisions of the import policy and the Import (Control) Order at the reference stage, although those provisions had not formed part of the adjudication order or the issues argued before the Tribunal. A question of law that was not raised before the Tribunal and on which no finding was recorded cannot be treated as a question arising out of its order. The reference jurisdiction cannot be used to supply omissions in the adjudication order or to introduce new legal arguments not previously canvassed.

Conclusion: The reference application was not maintainable and was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal declined to entertain a fresh legal issue introduced for the first time in reference proceedings and dismissed the applications.

Ratio Decidendi: A question of law not raised before the Tribunal and not decided by it cannot be introduced for the first time in reference proceedings.

---