9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in directing that the shares of the aforesaid company must be valued on yield basis when the assessee himself had sold 15,000 shares of the said company on April 10, 1984, at the rate of Rs. 10 per share as against the quoted value of Rs. 10.75 per share?" - we are not answering both the questions of law referred to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in directing that the shares of the aforesaid company must be valued on yield basis when the assessee himself had sold 15,000 shares of the said company on April 10, 1984, at the rate of Rs. 10 per share as against the quoted value of Rs. 10.75 per share?" The assessment year involved is 1985-86 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evealed that the official rate on the value of the share as on March 31, 1985, March 31, 1986 and March 31, 1987 was Rs. 10.75, yet the value of the shares was a negative figure in view of the poor financial results of the company in which the assessee held the shares. He therefore held that the price quoted in the stock exchange did not give the correct market value of the shares and directed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Department and on the basis of the directions of this court, the two questions referred to earlier have been referred to us. Notice was served on the respondent, but in spite of the same, the respondent has not appeared either in person or through his counsel. We heard Mr. T. Ravikumar, learned junior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue, and perused the records carefully. We find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal to arrive at its decision. We therefore hold that the Tribunal should consider the matter afresh ignoring clause (ka) of rule 1A of the Wealth-tax Rules and arrive at its conclusion independently whether the shares in question are quoted shares or unquoted shares. It is also made clear that it is open to the parties to lead further evidence in this matter. Accordingly, we are not ans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
