1992 (7) TMI 354 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Failure of the assessee to appear at the hearing and prepare necessary documents for the reference under Section 44(1) of M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh deals with a reference made under Section 44(1) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. The Tribunal had referred questions of law to the High Court for its opinion, but the assessee failed to appear at the hearing and neglected to prepare the required paper-books for the reference. The Court noted that the obligation to decide the question of law is dependent on the hearing being enabled, which is the responsibility of the party at whose instance the reference was made. The Court cited Section 256 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and a relevant judgment from the Calcutta High Court to support its decision that if the party causing the reference fails to appear, there is no obligation on the Court to answer the questions of law referred.

The Court emphasized that the party causing the reference must actively participate in the process, as seen in previous judgments from the Madhya Pradesh High Court and other High Courts. The Court highlighted that if both parties are not interested in the reference being answered, the High Court can decline to answer the questions referred. In a case from the Bombay High Court, it was established that the High Court's jurisdiction is advisory, and if the party causing the reference is not interested in the proceedings, there is no need for the Court to decide the questions of law academically.

Based on the precedents and legal principles discussed, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh concluded that if the party at whose instance the reference is made fails to appear at the hearing or take steps for the preparation of necessary documents, the Court is not obligated to answer the reference. Therefore, the Court refused to answer the reference in this case and imposed costs on the assessee for the department.