1. These appeals by special leave are against the common order dated March 8, 1976 rejecting three application Nos. 68, 69 and 70 of 1975 made by the appellant under Section 236 (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for an order directing the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case and refer the question of law arising out of the Tribunals order of the decision of the High Court. The question of law is as under.
"Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that notice served on April 10, 1962 under Section 34 of the Indian Income Tax, 1961, and the proceedings commenced in pursuance of the said notices and the orders passed therein were invalid and bad in law" *
2. The High Court rejected these applications taking the view that the matter was concluded by a decision of this Court as indicated in the Tribunals order rejecting the appellants applications made under Section 256 (1) of thewherein it was stated that the question of law is concluded by the decision in Banarsi Debi v. ITO
3. Having heard both sides we are of the opinion that the High Court as well as the Tribunal were in error in taking the view that the question of law is concluded in the present case by the decision in Banarsi Debi. The decision of this Court in Banarsi Debi was considered and explained in a subsequent decision of this Court in R. K. Upadhyaya v. Shanabhai P. Patel. It was pointed out that the meaning of the word "issued" is to be construed in the context and the setting in which it occurs so that is meaning my vary depending on the context. The question involved for decision in the present case is the meaning of the word "issued" occurring if Section 297 (2) (d) (i) of Income Tax Act, 1961. This question of law arises out of the Tribunals order and cannot be treated as concluded by the decision of this Court in Banarsi Debi as stated by the Tribunal as well as the High Court.
4. For the aforesaid reasons these appeals are allowed. The impugned orders are set aside. The High Court is required to direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer to it the aforesaid question of law for its decision.
5. No costs.