9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Validity of reference to Valuation Officer after completion of original assessment under Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Analysis: The case involved a question referred by the Tribunal under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, regarding the correctness of a reference made by the Wealth-tax Officer to the Valuation Officer after the completion of the original assessment. The Tribunal held that such a reference was not permissible after the completion of the original assessment, rendering the subsequent proceedings without jurisdiction. The Wealth-tax Officer had completed the assessment under section 16 of the Act and then referred the matter to the Valuation Officer. Based on the Valuation Officer's report, the Wealth-tax Officer initiated proceedings under section 17, alleging that the net wealth chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The Tribunal found this sequence of events to be procedurally improper, as no material was available with the Assessing Officer to form a belief before the reference to the Valuation Officer. Citing the legal principle from Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO, the court emphasized the need for finality in legal proceedings and the avoidance of reactivating stale issues. The court found no error in the Tribunal's view and upheld that the reference to the Valuation Officer after the completion of the original assessment was invalid. Consequently, the report of the Valuation Officer could not be the basis for alleging that the net wealth had escaped assessment. Ultimately, the court answered the referred question in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, concluding that the proceedings initiated by the Wealth-tax Officer were legally flawed. No costs were awarded, but counsel fees were specified for each side. The court directed the transmission of the order to the Tribunal as per rules, bringing the matter to a close.
|
