COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. MULTI METALS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON an application made to the Tribunal under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') the Tribunal refused to state the case and refer the questions formulated by the Revenue to this Court for its decision. It was contended by the learned counsel for the Revenue that the Tribunal could not have refused to make a reference to this Court because the question as to whether any case for rectification is made out or not is a question of law and in support of his contention the learned counsel placed reliance on the case of CIT vs. Kumar Transport (P.) Ltd. (1990) 85 CTR (Raj.) 182, wherein this Court took a view that whether the provisions of S. 154 of the Act are not applicable for rectifying the alleged mistake of granting development rebate on dumpers is a question of law. Again, in the case of CIT vs. Jaipur Udyog Ltd. (1979) 120 ITR 929 (Raj), this Court took a view that a question whether the Tribunal was competent to rectify its original order so as to increase the cost of certain machinery in exercise of its powers under S. 254(1) involves a question of law as to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and is, therefore, one which can be referred to the High Court under S. 256. In the instant case also the question as to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under s. 254 of the Act is also involved. We are of the opinion that the questions which have been formulated by the Revenue are questions of law, and, therefore, the Tribunal committed a mistake in refusing to allow the application under S. 256(1).

(2.) CONSEQUENTLY , we allow this application and direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question formulated by the Revenue to this Court for its opinion within a period of four months: