Ajit K.Sengupta, J. - (1.) This is a consolidated reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1974-75. The following three questions have been referred to this court at the instance of the assessee : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the second return signed by the constituted attorney was invalid in view of the provisions of the amended Act which came into force with effect from April 1, 1976?
(2.) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and having regard to the fact that the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer on the basis of the original return had been set aside to be completed de novo, as per the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the revised return filed by the assessee in the course of the reassessment was bad in law ?
(3.) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the disallowance of the assessee's claim for deduction of the enhanced municipal tax with effect from the fourth quarter of 1966-67 ?" 2. No one appeared in support of this reference on behalf of the assessee. We, therefore, decline to answer these questions. 3. At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions have been raised : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of Section 79(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in holding that, in order to reject the assessee's claim to the benefit of carry forward and set off of earlier years' losses, the Income-tax Officer should give adequate reasons for arriving at his satisfaction that the assessee adopted a device to transfer shares with a view to avoid or reduce any liability to tax ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the onus to prove that the change in the shareholding of the assessee-company was effected with a view to avoid or reduce any liability to tax was on the Income-tax Officer ; and that as that onus had not been discharged by him, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of carry forward and set off of earlier years' losses' against the income of the assessment year under appeal.";