Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. - (1.) Whether, question of law referable to the High Court, arises out of the order of the Appellate Income-tax Tribunal in this case, is, the question that arises in these appeals by special leave from the decision of the Orissa High Court (ILR (1974) Cut 374). Several questions of law were sought for from the Tribunal to be referred out of the decision of the Tribunal under section 256(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'Act'). The Tribunal refused to refer these questions. An application was made under section 256(2) of the Act asking for reference on those questions from the High Court. The High Court rejected the applications and refused to call for a statement of case on those questions. This appeal by special leave is from the said decision of the High Court.
(2.) It is not necessary to refer to all the questions that were pressed before the High Court because all these questions were not pressed before this Court.
(3.) The following questions were, however, canvassed before this Court: "1. Whether, the findings of the Appellate Tribunal, are vitiated in law by reason of it having ignored relevant and admissible evidence and having relied on incorrect facts and misstatement of facts 2. Whether. on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the conclusion of the Tribunal that the Kalinga Foundation Trust came into existence in 1947 and that it was distinct from the Trust created by the assessee in 1949 logically followed from the materials on record or it was perverse in the sense that no reasonable man could come to it on the said materials 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in arriving at the finding that the Kalinga Foundation Trust had acquired property from donations from the public, the Tribunal erred in law in not giving due consideration to the several matters relevant for determination of the points which had been considered by the Income-tax Officer in the assessment order 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the income from dividend shown in the name of the Kalinga Foundation Trust, the interest on the loans advanced in the name of the Kalinga Foundation Trust and all investments, remittances, receipts and actual payments in the name of Kalinga Foundation Trust did not belong to the assessee and should therefore be deleted from the assessment of the assessee 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any evidence in support of the Tribunal's findings that the assessee had collected donation from the public for the Kalinga Foundation Trust 6. If the answer to question 5 (rearranged by us) be in the negative, then whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the amounts donated by the assessee to the said trust were satisfactorily explained and accordingly they were not to be included in the assessment of the assessee 7. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the revenue authorities were bound to accept the decision of the Supreme Court in S. P. Jain v. Kalinga Tubes Ltd. as to the ownership of 39,000 shares of M/s Kalinga Tubes Ltd. in spite of the materials collected by the Income-tax Officer subsequent to the delivery of the judgment in the said case 8. If the answer to question 7 (rearranged by us) be in the negative then whether the finding of the Tribunal that the persons in whose names the said shares stood were not the benamidar of the assessee was perverse and was arrived at without due consideration of the material considered by the Income-tax Officer in detail on the point -;