COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. KAMALA GANAPATHY SUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these tax case references under section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, are preferred by the Revenue. They relate to different assessment years as mentioned below :

(2.) THE said common question is regarding the valuation for the purpose of wealth-tax assessment of the agricultural lands of the assessee, of an extent of 624.16 ordinary acres owned by the assessee, against which lands, proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the ceiling law"), had been taken and 15 standard acres equivalent to 30 ordinary acres had already been fixed as the ceiling area in respect of the family of the assessee and the balance 594.16 ordinary acres equivalent to 201.406 standard acres had been declared as surplus to become vested with the Government. According to learned counsel for the assessee, the said vesting has not taken place since section 18 notification under the ceiling law is only going to be issued shortly. Admittedly, by an earlier order of the Tribunal dated July 26, 1976, the market value of the abovesaid total lands as on the date of valuation dated March 31, 1973, in relation to the earlier assessment year 1973-74 was fixed at Rs. 10,00,000 under section 7 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, while computing the net wealth of the assessee in respect of the earlier assessment year 1973-74. But now by the impugned orders of the Tribunal, the earliest of which was passed on September 30, 1981, the said value was fixed at a lower figure, viz., Rs. 5,00,000. THE same value of Rs. 5,00,000 has been adopted for all the abovesaid assessment years in all the abovesaid tax cases. Aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred these tax cases against the abovesaid reduction in the market value of the abovesaid lands in question under section 7 of the Wealth-tax Act.

(3.) AS already indicated, this relates to the assessment year 1974-75. Almost in the same way, the second question in Tax Case No. 412 of 1986 is also worded, but it relates to the assessment year 1975-76. Further, almost in the same way, the second question referred to us in Tax Case No. 401 of 1986 is also worded. However, it relates to the assessment year 1977-78.