ORDER- This is a proceeding to bring on record in a Sales Tax Reference the heirs of the assessee and for condonation of delay if any. 2. According to Mr. Kanuga the provisions of Order 22, Rule 4 regarding the abatement has no application since the proceedings in Reference are only advisory in nature and the parties are heard not as contesting parties but only with a view to assist the Court in arriving at an opinion. In support of his contention he cites Commissioner of Income tax, West Bengal v. Gourishankar Lal Singha1, where in respect of Income tax reference such a view is taken. No difference between the provisions of Income Tax Act and Sales Tax Act is pointed out to me in so far as the references are concerned. 3. Mr. Joshi for the respondents contends that there is a material difference in the rules framed under the two Acts. He points out Rule 26 under Income tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 and contends that the necessity' for providing that appeal shall not abate as a result of the death of the assessee shows that there will be abatement but for this rule. He further relies on Jatashankar Dayaram v. Commissioner of Income tax which is a judgment of this Court. In that judgment it is held that section 141 of the Civil Procedure Code applies to a Reference under the Income Tax Act. 4. I do not see any conflict between the Calcutta judgment and the judgment of this Court. Even on the basis that section 141 of Civil Procedure Code is applicable it cannot be said that provisions of the Code regarding the abatement applying to references under Income Tax Act and Sales Tax Act, as laid down in the Calcutta judgment the reference to Court is only invoking of the advisory jurisdiction of the Court. The provisions of section 141 of the Code apply only in so far as they can be made applicable to the proceedings in question. Looking to the nature of the proceedings, namely, the reference, it cannot be said that the provisions regarding the abatement of suit can be made applicable to the reference under the said Act. In this respect, I respectfully agree with the judgment of the Calcutta High Court. 5. The rules relied on by Mr. Joshi apply only to the appeal before tbe Tribunal. In this respect, I respectfully agree with the judgment of the Calcutta High Court. 5. The rules relied on by Mr. Joshi apply only to the appeal before tbe Tribunal. The appeal being a judicial proceeding it could be that the provisions in Civil Procedure Code regarding abatement will apply and therefore an exemption from such a provision was necessary. Such a provision in the rules applicable only to the appeals before the Tribunal cannot have any bearing on the question as to whether a reference can abate. 6. In the circumstances the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer (a). Costs of the Chamber Summons costs in the reference. Chamber Summons made absolute.