9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (7) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assets of the father, this property was excluded from the share of the assessee and was eventually kept apart and utilised for the payment of arrears of taxes of the deceased ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the direction of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding ownership of this property is sustainable in law when the matter of the modified distribution including this property has been set aside by the Tribunal for fresh consideration by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) vis-a-vis the admission of the additional ground regarding the court order of the Second Civil Judge, Kanpur, dated May 22, 1984, in the subsequent assessment years ? (3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e departmental valuer's report, and the estate duty assessment of late Shri S. M. Bashir, when all the departmental reports relied upon by the Tribunal were subsequent to the date of the public auction in 1980 when the property had been sold as plot of land as structures had fallen down and in the estate duty assessment, the property was not assessed as a vacant plot ? (7) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the property was a vacant plot of land can be upheld in view of the positive evidence in the form of the valuation report of the Registered Valuer, Shri Shobha Ram, dated May 22, 1975, which also included the site plan of the property showing the structures existing on the land and was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect in law in not excluding the property No. 81A Gutaiya, Kanpur, from the net wealth of the assessee, after having recorded a conclusive finding in the orders of the subsequent assessment years, that the assessee was not the owner of this property on April 30, 1975, i.e., the relevant valuation date for the assessment year under reference, as the same had been gifted by him to his daughter in January, 1975 ? (11) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in rejecting the assessee's plea for excluding of this property on a technical ground that the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) was justified in not entertaining the assessee's plea, as the same was not taken in the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion that the value of the said asset has been included in his wealth. The very fact that the question relating to the exclusion of the said asset has been remanded by the Tribunal to the appellate authority shows that it has not been included in the wealth of the assessee. That question will arise after the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) decides the issues remanded to him. This question cannot, therefore, be referred. So far as question No. 4 is concerned, we are of the opinion that this question of law does arise from the order or the Tribunal and it ought to be referred to this court. We see no substance in question No. 5 inasmuch as the property first came into the hands of the assessee and then several years later it was sold. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
