Commissioner of Income Tax N.E. Region vs Assam Veneer Company

M.K. Sharma, J.—The question of law sought to be reference to this Court in this application of the Revenue u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relevant to the assessment year 1981-82 are as follows:

(1) Whether under the facts and circumstances the learned Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that delayed payment of Sales Tax under Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947 was not panel in nature?

(ii) Whether Tribunal did not (sic) in facts as well as in law in allowing deduction of Rs. 1,90,627/-

Mr. D.K. Talukdar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue has taken us through the order passed by the learned Tribunal on the application u/s 256(1) of the Income tax Act and on perusel of the same we find that the learned Tribunal hold that the aforesaid questions although questions of law are already covered by the decisions of this Court in the case of CIT v. Pheros and Corporation (P) Ltd reported in (1989) 1 GLR 165 , in which this Court followed the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax , Delhi, and also the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,

In our opinion as the questions sought for reference in the present application are also covered by the decisions of the Apex Court, answer to such questions even if called for would have to be recorded in terms of the same and as such no useful purpose would be served as we are bound to answer the question in-accordance with the ratio laid down in the said decisions of the Apex Court. Accordingly the reference application is rejected. We however, make no order as to cost.