COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. PADMABEN PANNALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this Court in respect of assessment years 1975-76 to 1978-79 :-

(2.) We have heard Mr BB Naik learned counsel for the revenue. Though served, none appears for the respondent-assessee.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revenue submits that question No. 1 had been referred for the opinion of this Court in view of the controversy which was then prevailing whether Rule 1BB providing for method of valuation of a house, which was inserted with effect from 1.4.1979, would apply to the valuation of a house for the assessment years prior to 1.4.1979. The learned counsel fairly states that the said controversy is now concluded by the decision of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Sons, 210 ITR 886 wherein the Supreme Court has held that Rule 1BB is merely a Rule of evidence and, therefore, procedural in nature and is applicable to all proceedings pending on 1.4.1979 when the Rule came into force. Hence, the rule was applicable to all cases pending on that date.