COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. MANJU RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", for opinion to this Court : Whether, the Tribunal is right in holding that the rectificatory valuation report drawn under Section 35(1)(aa) of the Wealth-tax Act by the Valuation Officer amounted to a second valuation report and thus was not admissible under law ?

(2.) The present reference relates to the assessment years 1981-82 to 1983-84. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :

(3.) The respondent is assessed for wealth-tax in the status of an individual. The valuation date is December 31, of each year. She owned, inter alia, a half share in Manjushree Cinema and a land at Nunhai, Agra. During the course of the assessment proceedings under the Act, the Wealth-tax Officer referred the question of valuation to the Assistant Valuation Officer, who determined the value of the assets in question vide order dated November 16, 1984. Subsequently, vide order dated March 28, 1985, the Assistant Valuation Officer had rectified his earlier report. It may be mentioned here that in the original report the Assistant Valuation Officer had taken the value on the rent capitalisation method whereas subsequently he passed the order of rectification on the basis of the land and building method. The Wealth-tax Officer had taken the value as given by the Assistant Valuation Officer vide order dated March 28, 1985, i.e., the second report as a result of rectification. Feeling aggrieved the respondent preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals), who had allowed the appeal and directed the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) to determine the valuation in accordance with section 16A of the Act. In the net result the subsequent report dated March 28, 1985, was not taken into consideration. The order has been upheld by the Tribunal.