Statutory reference remedies cannot overcome limitation when the Tribunal's refusal is time-barred and no power to condone delay exists.

A reference remedy is confined to the statutory ground on which it is available: an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 lies only where the Tribunal refuses to state the case because no question of law arises, so it is not maintainable against a refusal based on limitation. On the older section 66 regime, the Tribunal had no power to condone delay in a reference application under section 66(1), and the High Court could not direct the Tribunal to treat a barred application as timely. Relief was therefore unavailable on either basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was maintainable where the Appellate Tribunal had rejected the reference application as barred by time rather than for the reason that no question of law arose; (ii) Whether, assuming the proceeding to be governed by section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the High Court could direct the Appellate Tribunal to treat the reference application as filed within time or otherwise condone the delay.

Issue (i): Whether an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was maintainable where the Appellate Tribunal had rejected the reference application as barred by time rather than for the reason that no question of law arose.

Analysis: Section 256(2) applies only when the Tribunal refuses to state the case on the ground that no question of law arises. Here, the Tribunal rejected the reference application as time-barred. That ground does not attract the remedy under section 256(2), and the applicant cannot invoke that provision to challenge a refusal based on limitation.

Conclusion: The application was not maintainable under section 256(2) and the conclusion is against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether, assuming the proceeding to be governed by section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the High Court could direct the Appellate Tribunal to treat the reference application as filed within time or otherwise condone the delay.

Analysis: Under section 66, the relevant remedial provision operates only within its statutory limits. The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to condone delay in a reference application under section 66(1), and section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 applied only to applications under sections 66(2) and 66(3), not to section 66(1). The High Court therefore had no power to require the Tribunal to treat the barred application as timely or to condone the delay.

Conclusion: No relief could be granted under section 66(3), and the conclusion is against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference application failed under every possible statutory basis and was therefore rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference remedy confined by statute cannot be invoked where the Tribunal's refusal rests on limitation, and neither the Tribunal nor the High Court can extend time or condone delay beyond the powers expressly conferred by the governing provision.

---