SUDHIR AGARWAL,J. - (1.) After hearing Sri Alok Mathur, learned counsel For the Appellant and Sri Wasiqudding Ahead, learned counsel For the Respondents, we find that only substantial question of law, which has arisen in these appeals, is, "whether it was open to third Member, to whom certain specific points of dissents were referred for opinion, to answer those questions in his own way or decline to answer some of those questions, and due to lack of clear answers given or some questions remained unanswered by third Member, was it open to Regular Bench to hear the matter and decide appeal afresh, in the manner it likes without deciding the matter in the light of majority of opinion of Bench".
(2.) Since we are considering the procedure followed by Tribunal in deciding appeals, pending before it, filed by Revenue, as well as Assessee, we are not entering into merits of the matter.
(3.) There appears to be a difference of opinion between two Members of the Bench as a result whereof following seven questions were referred to third Member for his opinion. "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the fact that both assessee and the revenue have challenged the alternation of system of accounting by the ld. CIT(A) from mercantile to cash in the computation of assessee's income from the "Golden Key Scheme", the Tribunal with reference to its powers under sub-section (1) of Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could adjudicate the issue? (2) If the answer to question no. 1 is the affirmative whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, system of accounting to be adopted by the assessee should be cash or mercantile? (3) Whether if mercantile system of accounting is to be adopted the assessee should be entitled to prize money for the entire scheme running over 12 years during the first year itself? (4) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, proviso 1 appended to sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, could be invoked or not? (5) Whether either with reference to the provisions of Section 211 of the Contract Act or Sections 2(24), 4 and 5 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, any notional interest could be added in the hands of the assessee due to the delayed remittance of collections made by their agent M/s Sahara India in respect of "Golden Key Scheme"? (6) Whether in law as also according to the principles of natural justice the dissenting Member could refer to certain case laws of different High Courts (no dispute about Supreme Court case laws) not cited by either side during the hearing of the appeals? (7) Whether if adoption of mercantile system is upheld, the questions of discounting and application prorate in respect of deduction towards prize liability under the "Golden Key Scheme" should go back to the regular Bench for its decision, considering that the A.M. has not adjudicated on these aspects?" ;