https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21303 A reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act was not warranted where the proposed question on disallowance under section 40(b) was already covered by the Supreme Court in Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT. Because the Tribunal had followed that binding precedent, no live question of law remained for consideration. The application seeking a direction to state the case was therefore rejected. en-us Thu, 27 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 13:33:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21303 A reference under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act was not warranted where the proposed question on disallowance under section 40(b) was already covered by the Supreme Court in Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT. Because the Tribunal had followed that binding precedent, no live question of law remained for consideration. The application seeking a direction to state the case was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21303