DEEPAK VERMA,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri M.V. Seshachala, learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri S. Parthasarathi, learned Counsel for the respondent.
(2.) THE Revenue is before us against the order dated May 17, 2005, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench "A" in W. T. A. No. 25/Bang/2003 for the assessment year 1998 -99. This appeal has been preferred under Section 27A of the Wealth -tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter shall be referred to in short as "the Act"). The appeal before the Tribunal was preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth -tax (Appeals) -II, Bangalore, dated February 11, 2003. The said appeal having been allowed by the Tribunal, the Revenue is before us challenging the correctness of the said order.
(3.) EVEN though learned Counsel for the appellants has formulated three questions of law, but after having heard learned Counsel for the parties and after perusal of the records, we are of the considered opinion that only the following substantial question of law would arise for consideration of this Court: 1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the property bearing No. 54, Richmond Road, Bangalore, should be treated as stock -in -trade of the assessee and consequently exempted from wealth -tax since it was treated as stock -in -trade of the firm from which the assessee acquired it on dissolution? ;