IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:5.12.2006 1. I.T.R. No.7 of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Sanjeev Kumar, Ludhiana .....Respondent 2. I.T.R. No.7A of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Rajeev Kumar, Ludhiana .....Respondent 3. I.T.R. No.7B of 2001 Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Ludhiana .....Petitioner Vs. Amit Kumar (minor), Ludhiana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present:- Mr. S.K.Garg Narwana, Advocate for the petitioner. **** ORDER The following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court arising out of order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.733 to 736/Chandi / 89 dated 5.6.1990 in respect of assessment year 1981-82:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained investment in the purchase of shares worked out by the I.T.O on the basis of proved facts/ collateral evidence in the possession of the Department.” On 3.11.2006, following order was passed by this Court:- “This reference is pending for the last six years. Paper book I.T.R. No.7 of 2001 & etc. -2- has not been filed. The Revenue is granted four weeks' time to file the paper book failing which Reference will be returned unanswered. Adjourned to 5.12.2006.” In spite of liberty granted, paper book has not been filed. In view of the above, reference is returned unanswered. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE December 5, 2006 ( RAJESH BINDAL ) renu JUDGE