9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the circumstances of the case, it is open to the revenue to rely on rule ID even though no specific argument was raised before the Tribunal ? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in following the valuation as made by the valuers even though the valuation was not based on the statutory method of valuation provided under rule 1D? 4. Whether, the valuers to whom the valuation of shares was referred under section 24(6) of the Act, were, in law, bound to follow the method of valuation prescribed by rule ID of the Wealth-tax Rules? " For the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 the assessee, an individual, valued the unquoted shares of companies belonging to the J. K. group by taking the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per the valuation report. It may be noted that as a result, the value of the unquoted shares was taken at a somewhat increased rate than what had been adopted by the AAC and in the result the revenue's appeals were partly allowed. Still aggrieved the revenue has got the questions indicated above referred to this court. It would be seen that so far as questions Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are concerned, they do not arise out of the Tribunal's order and we have, therefore, to return them unanswered. So far as questions Nos. 3 and 4 (sic) are concerned, in view of the provision contained in s. 24(6) of the Act, the Tribunal acted rightly in deciding the appeals in conformity with the valuation report. This provision in so far as it is relevant for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 957. The situation which obtains in the present case is entirely different. Here at the instance of the revenue which was appellant before the Tribunal, the question of valuation of unquoted equity shares was referred to the arbitration of valuers. When the assessee failed to nominate his valuer, the Tribunal passed a formal order and nominated such valuer and thus under sub-s. (6)(a) of s. 24, the Tribunal was bound to pass its order in the appeal conformably to the decision of the valuers. In the result, questions Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are returned unanswered while question No. 3 is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The assessee is entitled to costs which we assess at Rs. 250. - - Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
