COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. PARMOD KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of a bunch of 33 petitions viz., WTC Nos. 37, 38, 68 to 76, 80 to 85, 88 to 90, 92, 93, 100 to 107, 109, 110 of 1989 and 2 of 1990. Since the basic case on the basis of which all these matters are being decided, is WTC No. 76 of 1989, facts are taken from the said case.

(2.) THE Revenue has filed this petition under s. 27(3) of the WT Act, 1957 (for short, "the Act"), seeking a direction to the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, Delhi (for short, "the Tribunal"), to refer the following questions of law,

(3.) BEFORE approaching this Court, the Revenue had filed an application under s. 27(1) of the Act requiring the Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer these questions to this Court. This application was rejected vide order dt. 31st "What should be the market value of an asset is basically a question of fact. The Revenue's charge in one of the proposed questions that this Tribunal has ignored the awards passed by the Addl. Distt. Judge and the Hon'ble High Court is incorrect because it is after taking into such awards that the valuation for the asst. yrs. 1979 -80 to 1985 -86 has been determined. Such a question therefore, does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal. Similarly, the question whether the two lands were similar is a question of fact and the Tribunal was justified in making this assumption because the Collector had awarded the same amount of compensation for both the pieces of land. The District Judge who awarded a much higher compensation about a decade later was not apprised of the earlier award by another Judge @ Rs. 10 per sq. yd. In fact the WTO has himself treated these lands similar by adopting the same rate for them both."