9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (8) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hands of the assessee under section 16(3) of the Act ?" The facts of the case, as set out in the statement of the case. submitted by the Tribunal, are as follows: The assessee, a Muslim, claimed in his assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1961-62 that a particular item of income is not his income but that of his wife. According to him he had transferred for consideration the property from out of which the income in question arose to his wife for a consideration of Rs. 1 lakh. His case was that at the time of his marriage with the transferee, in 1930, a meher of Rs. 10,000 had been fixed. But, in 1960, he enhanced the meher to rupees one lakh and in February or March of that year he orally transferred the property in quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 10,000 to Rs. 1,00,000 ? (3) Without prejudice to the questions Nos. 1. and 2 above, whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the property transferred to the wife in consideration of dower debt did not attract, the provisions of section 16(3)(a)(iii) ?" The Tribunal opined that the only question of law that arose for reference is the one mentioned by us earlier. In fact the Tribunal's question proceeds on the basis that there was in fact a transfer as alleged by the assessee and that transfer is a valid one. The question on which the Tribunal sought the opinion of the High Court was whether the income of the property so transferred could be assessed to tax under section 16(3) of the Act: The question framed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Tribunal. It cannot take into consideration questions of law which have not been referred to it for its opinion. If the High Court thought that the question referred to it did not bring out the real point in issue it was open to it to call for a fresh statement of the case and direct the Tribunal to submit for its opinion the real question arising for decision. The High Court did not do so. On the other hand the High Court dealt with the reference as if it was dealing with an appeal before it. It failed to realise the limits of its jurisdiction in references under section 66(1). It was urged by Mr. Manchanda, the learned counsel for the department, that on the face of it, the transfer pleaded by the assessee is an invalid one and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
