Commissioner of Income Tax vs Nandalal Parshuram

M.K. Sharma, J.—This is an application u/s 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated February 7, 1991, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati, in R. A. No. 63(G) of 1990 for the assessment year 1984-85 rejecting the reference application u/s 256(1) filed by the Revenue. The Revenue seeks to refer to this court for its opinion the following questions stated to be questions of law :

"(1) Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that the tractors are not road transport vehicles ?

(2) Whether the Tribunal did not err in fact as well as in law in allowing investment allowance on tractors ?"

We have heard Mr. D.K. Talukdar, learned standing counsel for the Revenue, and also Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the assessee.

We have been taken through the questions of law sought to be referred to this court and also the orders passed by the learned Tribunal and the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax.

On a perusal of the aforesaid orders and the questions of law we find that the questions as framed by the Revenue are questions of law which could be referred to this court for its opinion. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we feel that the 2 (two) questions of law aforesaid sought to be referred to this court could be clubbed into one which we hereunder do :

"Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that the tractors are not road transport vehicles and also in allowing investment allowance on the tractors ?"

We may reiterate that the aforesaid question is a question of law and, therefore, we direct the learned Tribunal to submit a statement of the case to this court and to refer the aforesaid question for opinion to this court.

Accordingly, we allow the application. No order as to costs.