9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 493X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as preferred this wealth tax reference application under Section 27(3) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 to direct the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur to refer the question of law framed by applicant/revenue in its application under Section 27(1) of the Act, which has been dismissed by ITAT vide order dated 14th February, 1994. 3. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hod of land and building instead of profit capitalisation method. On an appeal, the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) set aside the order of assessing officer and directed the Wealth Tax Officer to adopt profit capitalisation method and not the valuation method. Thereafter, revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which was also dismissed. The revenue, thereafter, filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alkies, Kota and in that case Revenue's Reference Application had been rejected by the Tribunal. We had further mentioned that in assessee's own cases for the assessment years 1976-77 to 1980-81 the assessments had been framed on the same basis, which had not been challenged by the Revenue. We are, therefore, unable to appreciate how for the two year under consideration the Revenue has considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elf 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. 8. In these circumstances, we find no merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
