2011 (9) TMI 493 - HC - Wealth-tax

Valuation of property - Profit capitalization method or Valuation method (land/building method) - Held That - When revenue has accepted the decision of the Tribunal in the case of assessee itself for the Assessment Years 1976-77 to 1980-81 then there was no reason to refer the question to this Court. The reason assigned by Tribunal for not referring the question is absolutely justified and legal and no interference in the same is called for. Even otherwise also we are satisfied that question so framed cannot be said to be a question of law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Wealth tax reference application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957.
2. Tribunal's refusal to refer a question of law to the High Court.

Analysis:
1. The Revenue filed a wealth tax reference application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, seeking direction for the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to refer a question of law framed by the Revenue in its application under Section 27(1) of the Act. The Tribunal had dismissed the application, prompting the Revenue to challenge the decision. The Revenue contended that the question formulated in the application was a question of law that should have been referred to the High Court. The Revenue sought the setting aside of the impugned order and a direction for the Tribunal to refer the question of law for the High Court's decision.

2. The case involved an individual who had an interest in a company owning a property. The assessing officer determined the value of the interest using a valuation method different from what the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) directed. The Revenue appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which also dismissed the appeal. Subsequently, the Revenue filed a reference application to refer a specific question of law to the High Court. However, the Tribunal dismissed the application, citing previous decisions and the lack of a referable question of law. The Tribunal justified its decision by highlighting consistency in assessments and the acceptance of previous Tribunal decisions by the Revenue. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's application and dismissed it accordingly.

3. The Tribunal's decision was based on the rationale that the Revenue had accepted previous Tribunal decisions in similar cases and had not challenged assessments conducted on the same basis in the past. Therefore, the Tribunal deemed the question framed by the Revenue as not constituting a question of law warranting reference to the High Court. The Tribunal's refusal to refer the question was deemed legally justified, considering the circumstances and the lack of a valid legal question. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's application and upheld the dismissal, concluding that the question framed did not qualify as a question of law necessitating reference to the High Court.