ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is against the High Courts order rejecting the application made under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act to call for a reference on the following question of law, namely, "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was nght4frlaw in upholding the order of the CIT (A) directing the ITO to exclude the capital gains an sing from the transfer of agricultural lands from the assessment ?" 3. The High Court rejected the applicatiir view of the decisions in Manubhai A. Sheth v. ND Nirgudkar ((1981) 128 ITR 87 (Bom)) and J. Raghottama Reddy v. ITO ((1988) 169 ITR 174 (AP). However, an explanation has been inserted in sub-section (1-A) of Section 2 of the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act, 1989 with retrospective effect from 1-4-1970 to overcome the effect of those decisions. This being so, the a aforesaid question of law does arise out of the Tribunals order. 4. Consequently, the appeal is allowed with the result that the application made under Section 256(2) of the Act for reference of the above question of law is allowed.