9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Valuation of property as per Schedule III of Wealth-tax Act for assessment year 1989-90 and onwards. Analysis: The judgment concerns an application under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, where the Revenue sought direction for the Tribunal to refer a question of law to the High Court regarding the valuation of a property. The dispute arose from the assessment of the share of the assessee in an immovable property, "Jindal General Manufacturing Company, Delhi." The Wealth-tax Officer assessed the share at Rs. 16,19,000 based on an approved valuer's report, while the District Valuation Officer valued it higher. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax found the assessment erroneous and set it aside, directing a fresh assessment considering the District Valuation Officer's report. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal and instructed the Wealth-tax Officer to value the share as per amended rules in Schedule III after providing a hearing to the assessee. The Revenue then applied to refer a question of law to the High Court, which the Tribunal dismissed. The main issue in this case revolves around the applicability of amended valuation provisions effective from April 1, 1989, to the assessment. The judgment highlights that procedural provisions, such as those in Schedule III of the Act, are applicable to pending cases. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup and Sons [1994] 210 ITR 886, the court emphasized that procedural laws apply to pending cases, including rules of evidence for determining market value. The court concluded that the controversy was settled by the Supreme Court's ruling, indicating that no referable question of law existed. Therefore, the Tribunal's decision to refuse the reference was upheld, as the matter had been addressed by the higher court's precedent. In conclusion, the court dismissed the application under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, stating that since the issue had been conclusively decided by the Supreme Court's judgment, there was no merit in the Revenue's application. The court affirmed that procedural laws apply to pending cases, including valuation rules, and upheld the Tribunal's decision to not refer the question to the High Court. The application was deemed to lack merit, and accordingly, it was dismissed.
|
