CHAKRAVARTTI,C.J. - (1.) THE question referred in this case is the following :-- "Whether the ITO dealing with the assessments for the years 1948-49, 1949-50 and 1950-51 was entitled in law to go behind the original cost which was accepted by his predecessors in the assessments for 1939-40 to 1945-46 ?"
(2.) THE reference was made at the instance of the assessees. The learned advocate has prayed that her clients may be allowed to withdraw the application for a reference inasmuch as, although the point was covered by the decision of this Court in Karnani Industrial Bank Ltd vs. CIT (1954) 25 ITR 558 (Cal), the reference was caused to be made in order that the question might be finally determined by the Supreme Court. She says further that the application to the Supreme Court for special leave to appeal from the case of Karnani Industrial Bank Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), has since been dismissed. In the circumstances, she says that her clients do not want to pursue this reference any further and that they should be allowed to withdraw the reference. There does not appear to be any provision in the IT Act under which a party who has caused a reference to be made can be allowed to withdraw it after the Tribunal has made a reference to this Court. A reference made to this Court must be decided unless at least the party who had caused the reference to be made fails to appear and to take any interest in the matter. In the present case the assessees have appeared through an advocate and have brought it to our notice that the question has now been finally determined against the contention of the assessees by the highest Court of the country. In the circumstances the only order which we can possibly make is an order in accordance with our previous decision now affirmed by the Supreme Court.
(3.) THE answer to the question referred must therefore be in the affirmative.;