https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18491 Unsettled questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act require reference for judicial opinion, whereas issues conclusively settled by the Supreme Court do not. The maintainability of an appeal despite pursuing revision was already governed by Supreme Court authority and therefore did not warrant reference. In contrast, the scope of interest liability under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, including whether liability turns solely on the shortfall between advance surtax paid and assessed surtax, remained unresolved. That issue was referable, and the Tribunal was required to refer it for opinion. en-us Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 12:48:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18491 Unsettled questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act require reference for judicial opinion, whereas issues conclusively settled by the Supreme Court do not. The maintainability of an appeal despite pursuing revision was already governed by Supreme Court authority and therefore did not warrant reference. In contrast, the scope of interest liability under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, including whether liability turns solely on the shortfall between advance surtax paid and assessed surtax, remained unresolved. That issue was referable, and the Tribunal was required to refer it for opinion. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18491