Supreme Court Of India
Saraswathi Oil Traders vs. CIT
Section 256(2)
Asst. Year 1990-91, 1991-92
S.P. Bharucha, C.J.; K.T. Thomas & Shivaraj V. Patil, JJ.
Civil Appeal Nos. 823 & 824 of 2002
29th January, 2002
Counsel Appeared
Ms. S.R. Anuradha Pradeep, Ms. Kavitha Wadra, Mahinder Singh & Mrs. Pratibha M. Singh, for the Appellant : Soli J. Sorabjee with Ranbir Chandra & B.V. Balram Das, for the Respondent
ORDER
BY THE COURT :
Leave granted.
2. The order under challenge was passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka on an application by the Revenue under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961. The Revenue sought to refer to the High Court the following question : “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in deleting the additions made on account of bogus purchases of groundnut cakes as well as additions made on account of unaccounted income of sale of groundnut oil for the asst. yrs. 1990-91 and 1991-92 ?”
The Tribunal declined to make the reference because, in its view, the question was not a question of law. The High Court found it necessary to record that a careful assessment of the record would indicate that there was a definite point of law involved and that the Tribunal’s conclusion was incorrect.
As we read the question, it does not involve any question of law and the High Court has not recorded what definite point of law it found was involved. We must record that, with fairness, the learned Attorney-General has not supported the order of the High Court.
The civil appeals are allowed. The order under challenge is set aside. No order as to costs.
[Citation : 254 ITR 259]