- (1.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the following questions of law do arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal : "(1) Whether in law and on the facts of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has not exceeded its jurisdiction by admitting and allowing the miscellaneous application of the assessee when it amounted to revision of its own order which is not permissible in law, and which cannot be covered as a mistake apparent from record, which only can be rectified under Section 256(2) ? (2) Whether in law and on the facts, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the closing stock of free sugar as on August 30, 1978, should be valued at two different rates, i.e., 42,704 quintals should be valued at Rs. 85,58,293 being the amount realised on sale up to November 30, 1978, which is after the closing of the previous year and the balance sugar of 28,789 quintals should be valued at Rs. 207.86 per quintal which was the cost price as on June 30, 1978, and thus adopting an altogether new principle which has got no sanctity in law and in accountancy ?"
(2.) ACCORDINGLY, we direct the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid questions to this court for its opinion. However, there will be no order as to costs.;