S.K.Jha, J.

1. These two cases were taken up together as parties and the questions involved in them are common. They were primarily referred to a Full Bench in view of the two inconsistent decisions in the case of CIT V/s. Daimler Benz (A.G.) [1977] 108 ITR 961, a judgment of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court, and the case of CIT V/s. Geeta Ram Kali Ram [1980] 121 ITR 708, a judgment of the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court.

2. Before 1 embark upon the question of correctness of either of these two decisions, it is worthwhile to mention the facts as borne out by the statement of case which, again, is common in both the cases. These are references under Sec.256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act"), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, A Bench, Patna (hereinafter to be called " the Tribunal "), and the following questions of law have been framed for the opinion of this court :

" 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in refusing to admit the additional ground claiming that the assessees income for the assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65 was exempt under Sec.11 of the Income-tax