COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX Vs. JANKI KISHORI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to a direction by this court in Miscellaneous Wealth -tax Applications Nos. 1338, 1339, 1340 and 1341 of 1977 by means of the order dated January 16, 1978, the Appellate Tribunal (Income -tax) Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has stated the case on the following question under section 27 of the Wealth -tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the Zamindari Abolition and Relief and Rehabilitation Bonds issued by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh were covered by the term 'security' mentioned in section 5(1)(xxii) of the Wealth -tax Act ?'

(2.) THE assessee, Smt. Janki Kishori Devi, is an individual. Her total wealth consists of both movable and immovable properties. She also holdsU. P. Zamindari Abolition Compensation Bonds and U. P. Zamindari Abolition Rehabilitation Grant Bonds (hereinafter referred to as the 'Compensation Bonds' and 'Rehabilitation Bonds', respectively):1 The dispute pertains to the inclusion of the values of these bonds in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment years 1971 -72 to 1974 -75. The market value of these bonds as included in the net taxable wealth of the assessee by the Wealth -tax Officer is quoted below against each assessment year.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved against the refusal to grant exemption by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth -tax, Allahabad, the assessee preferred a further appeal before the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal and the said Tribunal, in the ultimate analysis, accepted the contention of the assessee in so far as she claimed exemption of her bonds under section 5(1)(xxii) of the Act. To rephrase, the value of her Compensation Bonds and Rehabilitation Bonds was held to be exempted 'securities' of the Government of U. P. within the meaning of Clause (xxii) of section 5(1) of the Act. In the backdrop of the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal(Income -tax), the Department made applications under section 27(1) of the Act for stating the case on the question referred to above to the High Court but the same were rejected. However, by means of the order dated January 16, 1978, the High Court required the Tribunal to draw up the statement of the case and refer the question as stated supra for its opinion.