B.R.ARORA, J. - (1.) THE Revenue has moved this application under S. 256(2) of the IT Act with a prayer that the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur may be directed to refer the following three questions of law for the opinion of the High Court in the case of assessee Bhanwar Lal for the asst. yr. 1987-88, which, according to the Revenue, arise out of the order dt. 30th April, 1993 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No. 1377/Jp/1990 : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was legally justified in : (i) upholding the order of CIT(A) thereby accepting the agriculture income of the assessee as shown by him on the basis of alleged declared income from this source in asst. yrs. 1986-87 and 1988-89 which have been set-aside under S. 263 of the IT Act ? (ii) upholding the order of the learned CIT(A) that difference between estimated agriculture income of Rs. 1,11,000 and as shown by the assessee and his family members at Rs. 2,58,000 should not be treated as the assessee's undisclosed income from his real estate business ? (iii) deleting the addition of Rs. 20,000 made on account of low house-hold expenses ?"
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. A search was conducted at the residence of the assessee by the IT Department under S. 132 of the Act on 22nd Aug., 1987 which continued upto 31st Aug., 1987. During this raid, the statements of the assessee and his sons were recorded. The assessee, for the asst. yr. 1987-88, on 23rd Feb., 1988, filed the return of his income declaring the taxable income at Rs. 36,821 and the agricultural income of Rs. 1,18,550. The ITO, Central Circle, Jodhpur, for the asst. yr. 1987-88 took the agricultural income at Rs. 1,11,000 and vide order dt. 26th March, 1990 completed the assessment on a total income of Rs. 2,09,331. The assessee, aggrieved with the order dt. 26th March, 1990 passed by the Asstt. CIT, Central Circle, Jodhpur, preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), Jodhpur. The CIT(A), Jodhpur, by his order dt. 3rd Aug., 1990 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee in part. The assessee, aggrieved with the order dt. 3rd Aug., 1990 filed an appeal before the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. The Revenue, also, filed an appeal challenging the order passed by the CIT(A), Jodhpur. Both these appeals relating to the asst. yr. 1987-88 were decided by the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur by its order dt. 30th April, 1993. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed while the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed by the Tribunal.
(3.) AGGRIEVED with the order dt. 30th April, 1993 passed by the Tribunal, the Revenue moved an application under S. 256(1) of the Act to refer the questions of law mentioned in para 1 above for the opinion of the High Court and the Tribunal, by its order dt. 28th Feb., 1994 refused to refer these questions because according to the Tribunal, no referable questions of law arise out of the judgment passed by the Tribunal as the decision of the Tribunal is based on the facts and the appreciation of the evidence.;