LAKSHMI KANT JHA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under Sub-section (1) of Section 27 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna, stating the following questions of law for the opinion of this Court:

(2.) The assessee was the late Maharajadhiraj of Darbhanga. While computing his net assets for the purpose of the Wealth Tax Act, a dispute arose in respect of (1) the deduction from the market value of the shares held by the assessee of the brokerage commission (question No. 1), (2) complete exclusion from the assets of those ornaments and jewellery of the Darbhanga Raj which were intended for the personal or household use of the Maharajadhiraj (question No. 2), and (3) the exclusion from the total assets of any part of the amount of compensation which was not actually paid to him by the State (question No. 3).

(3.) Question No. 3 -- Mr. Lalnarayan Sinha for the assessee, quite fairly, stated that, in view of a Bench decision of this Court in Maharai Kumar Kamal Singh v. Commissioner of Wealth-Tax. Bihar, AIR 1966 Pat 282, this question must be answered against the assessee. In that decision, It was held that, as soon as the estate of an ex-proprietor vests in the Government under the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, that proprietor is entitled to receive compensation, though the date of payment of the compensation and the manner in which it will be paid have been left to the discretion of the State Government. Hence, merely because the sum of Rs. 36, 87. 419 payable to the assessee for the vesting of his estate with the State Government has not yet been paid and there is likely to be much delay in paying the same, that sum cannot be deducted from his assets for the purpose of the Wealth-Tax Act. The Bench decision is binding on us, and this is not a fit case to refer the question to a larger Bench. Hence, Mr. Lalnarayan Sinha, while reserving the right to challenge the correctness of the decision before a superior Court if and when the occasion may arise, conceded that this question should be answered against the assessee.