MISHRIMAL GULAB CHAND Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application was filed on 25-1-1950 and was for leave to appeal to the Federal Court under Section 66A (a), Income-tax Act. There is an office report that the application was one day beyond time. It does not appear that there is any period fixed, under the Income-tax Act, for an application for leave to appeal under Section 66A (2). Section 66A (3) is as follows :

(2.) This was a reference by the Appellate Tribunal and two questions of law were referred to us. The questions were as follows :

(3.) Section 66A (2) requires that the High Court should certify that the case is a fit one for appeal. The words are exactly similar to the language of Section 109 (c), Civil P. C., where the High Court is required to certify, where the valuation is not above Rs. 10,000, that the case is a fit one for appeal to "His Majesty in Council." In a case coming under Section 109 (c), Civil P. C., their Lordships of the Judicial Committee have held in Radha Krishna Das v. Bai Krishna Chand, 28 Ind. App. 182, that the mere fact that the case involved a question of law was not enough to justify a certificate on the ground of fitness. The matter again came up for decision before their Lordships of the Judicial Committee in Radhakrishna Ayyar v. Swaminatha Ayyar, 48 Ind. App. 31 and after having discussed Radha Krishna Das' case and other cases their Lordships said that :