1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act of 1961”), for directing the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to state the case and refer the following questions of law said to be arising out of its order dated January 17, 1995, passed in I.T.A. No. 89/JP of 1995 because an application under Section 256(1) has been rejected by the Tribunal on January 22, 1996, by holding that no question of law arises out of the appellate order:

“1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in cancelling the penalty under Section 271(1)(a) on the ground that the assessee was ignorant of law whereas the facts indicate that he defied the law even after service of notice?

2. Whether the Income tax Appellate Tribunal’s order cancelling the penalty under Section 271(1)(a) is not perverse ?”

3. It has been stated by learned Counsel for the respondent that since filing of the present application and during the pendency of this case the Central Board of Revenue has promulgated the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, popularly known as K