N. D. OJHA, J. ( 1 ) BY means of this application under Section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the commissioner of Income-tax, Allahabad, has made a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, may be directed to refer the following three questions to this court for its opinion : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of, the Tribunal upholding the deletion of entertainment expenditure is vitiated as it has failed to appreciate the provisions of Section 37 (2b) of the Act correctly ? ( 2 ) WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal upholding the deletion of extra profit is correct when the Tribunal has ignored to consider that G. P. rate disclosed in the earlier year was better and that the proviso to Section 145 (1) was applicable ? ( 3 ) WHETHER, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the relief allowed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ? "2. Having heard counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that in view of the plain language of Sub-section (2b) of Section 37 of the aforesaid Act which starts with the words "notwithstanding anything contained in this section" question No. 1, referred to above, is a question of law which arises from the appellate order of the Tribunal. As regards question No. 2, we are of the opinion that the findings recorded by the Tribunal in the appellate order in regard to this question are findings of fact and the said question cannot be said to be a question of law arising out of the said order. 3. As regards question No. 3, that is indeed, a consequential question. In so far as it relates to question No. 1, the same is already covered by the said question No. 1 and it need not be directed to be referred again. Likewise, so far as it is consequential to question No. 2 for the same reasons as stated in regard to question No. 2, this part of question No. 3 also does not arise from the appellate order of the Tribunal. Likewise, so far as it is consequential to question No. 2 for the same reasons as stated in regard to question No. 2, this part of question No. 3 also does not arise from the appellate order of the Tribunal. ( 4 ) IN the result, this application succeeds and is allowed in part to this extent that the Income-tax appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, is directed to draw up a statement of the case and refer question No. 1 quoted above to this court for its opinion. The application in regard to questions Nos. 2 and 3 is dismissed. In view of their divided success, the parties will bear their own costs. .