COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Sri M. Katiu, learned counsel for the Commissioner of WEalth-tax and Sri C.S. Agarwal for the assessee. At the outset, Sri C.S. Agarwal raised a preliminary objection relying on a decision of the Delhi High Court in CWT v. Himalaya Trading Co. [1987] 168 ITR 586. The objection was that the Tribunal having adopted a particular method of calculating the fair market value which was reasonable and proper, no question of law can be said to arise out of the order of the Tribunal. WE are unable to agree. In our opinion, the objection begs the issue whether this application should be allowed or not. In the decision cited by learned counsel for the assessee, the High Court had found as a fact that the Tribunal had adopted a well recognised method of evaluating the fair market value of the land and that, in any case, the method adopted by the Tribunal was a reasonable method of evaluation. It is to ascertain these very aspects that we are proposing to ask the Tribunal to refer the following questions of law which, in our opinion, do arise out of the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. WE, accordingly, direct the Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions of law for our opinion :

(2.) THE application is, accordingly, allowed, but there will be no order as to costs.