- (1.) FOR the asst. yr. 1975-76 an order of assessment was passed against the opposite party, the assessee, under S. 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') on 20th March, 1978. The CIT, however, subsequently issued a notice to the opposite party under S. 263(1) of the Act and after hearing the opposite party passed an order on 15th March, 1980 whereby he directed the ITO to prefix the term 'protective' to the order of assessment dt. 20th March, 1978. The matter was taken up by the assessee before the Tribunal 'A' Ward , Allahabad. It appears that the order passed by the CIT in proceedings under S. 263(1) was passed on an earlier order passed under the same section against Ram Mohan Das Tondon also. Both these appeals were allowed by the Tribunal. The CIT thereafter made an application before the Tribunal under S. 256(1) of the Act for referring to this Court the following question : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in cancelling the order under S. 263(1) of the Act made by the CIT?"
(2.) THE Tribunal by its order dt. 29th July, 1983 refused to refer the aforesaid question to this Court on the ground that a similar application for making reference in the case of Ram Mohan Das Tandon had been rejected by it. Aggrieved, the CIT has made the present application before this Court under S. 256(2) with prayer that the Tribunal may be required to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question of law to this Court. The counsel for the opposite party, the assessee, has brought to our notice that against the order passed by the Tribunal in the case of Ram Mohan Das Tandon also, the CIT has made an application before this Court under S. 256(2) for referring a similar question for opinion of this Court. The said application was numbered as IT Application No. 126 of 1983 and that the same was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 9th August, 1984. A certified copy of that order has also been produced before us. Since the order passed in the instant case was passed on the basis of the order passed in the case of Ram Mohan Das Tandon and since the application under S. 256 (2) in the case of Ram Mohan Das Tandon has already been dismissed by this Court on 9th August,. 1984, we are of the opinion that it is not possible in these circumstances to hold that the aforesaid question of law arises from the appellate order of the Tribunal.
(3.) IN the result, this application fails and is dismissed. There would be no order as to costs. *****;