JUDGMENT K. B. Asthana, C.J. - We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We do not find that a case has been made out for asking for a statement of the case is that the Tribunal on the question proposed in the application. The simple case is that the applicant reconstituted their firm and applied for registration. The application for registration was delayed by more than a month. The Income-tax Officer held that there was no sufficient case made out for excusing the delay. The application was rejected. It is worthwhile to mention that the applicants themselves filed the return as an unregistered firm. Before the Tribunal again the matter was agitated. The Tribunal observed at one place in its judgement that as a new case was being set up for condoning the delay, the question would not be considered. The learned counsel submitted that this is a mistake of fact on the part of the Tribunal as no new case was being set up. Observing this, the Tribunal refused to condone the delay on the question that the applicant themselves have filed a return as an unregistered firm. No question of law arises. The application is dismissed. We assess a cost of Rs. 100/-payable by the applicant to the Commissioner of Income tax, Kanpur.