9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (10) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, to refer the following questions of law for decision of this court : " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), especially when the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in confirming the direction of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) given to the Wealth-tax Officer to recompute the assessee's beneficial interest with reference to the principal value of the corpus at Rs. 16.20 crores as against Rs. 32.43 crores valued by the Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act ? " The respondent herein is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellate authority. However, as regards the valuation, the Commissioner purporting to follow his own orders in certain connected cases directed the entire corpus of the jewellery to be valued at Rs. 16.20 crores, instead of the valuation of Rs. 32.43 crores adopted by the Wealth-tax Officer. Aggrieved by this part of the order of the Commissioner, the Department filed an appeal to the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made rejecting the Departmental Valuer's estimation. More over, admittedly in this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) had not followed the procedure prescribed under section 23(3A) of the Wealth-tax Act which enjoins on the appellate authority to give an opportunity of hearing to the Valuation Officer. That apart, it cannot be stated as a universal proposition of law that the question of valuation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
