AKBER A DEHGAMWALLA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WT Ref. No. 5 is at the instance of the Department. WT Ref. No. 12 involves cross references, i.e., both at the instance of the assessee as well as the Department. The assessee's reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1963 64 and 1964 65 only whereas the references at the instance of the Department relate to the asst. yrs. 1963 64 to 1969 70 (both inclusive).

(2.) SO far as the assessee's reference is concerned, the Tribunal has referred to this Court only one question of law for opinion under S. 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957. The question reads thus : WT Ref. No. 12 of 1977 :

(3.) THE assessee accepted the learned single judge's aforesaid order. But, the Union of India challenged it in appeal, inter alia, on the grounds that the assessee's suit for specific performance was barred by limitation, that the contract was not binding on the Union of India in view of the mandatory provisions of S. 175 of the Government of India Act, 1935, that there was no binding contract between the parties as alleged, that the alleged agreement was provisional, that the terms of the contract were to come into force on the execution by the Governor General in Council of the agreement of lease in the assessee's favour and that as no formal agreement of lease was executed between the parties, no subsisting contract had come into existence. The appeal was, however, dismissed by the Division Bench by judgment dt. 16th July, 1965.