https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61401 A reference under Section 256(1) was held unnecessary because the question whether the wife's loss could be set off against the assessee's income under Section 64(1)(i), read with Explanation 2, had already been answered by the Supreme Court in an identical controversy. The Tribunal treated the point as covered by binding precedent, so the proposed reference had become purely academic and no useful purpose would be served by seeking a fresh opinion. The reference application was dismissed, and the issue stood concluded in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 31 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:14:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61401 A reference under Section 256(1) was held unnecessary because the question whether the wife's loss could be set off against the assessee's income under Section 64(1)(i), read with Explanation 2, had already been answered by the Supreme Court in an identical controversy. The Tribunal treated the point as covered by binding precedent, so the proposed reference had become purely academic and no useful purpose would be served by seeking a fresh opinion. The reference application was dismissed, and the issue stood concluded in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61401