- (1.) The High Court declined to call for a reference, at the behest of the Revenue, of the following question : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case including in particular the fact that part of the official residence of the ex-ruler of Ratlam who is the assessee-respondent, stood let out, the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption of the value of the said property in its entirety under S. 5 (1) (iii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 -it did so for the reason that, in its view, no question of law was raised. It appears, in fact, that the question was not referred because the answer was indicated by an earlier judgment of the High Court.
(2.) A question of law does clearly arise. In fact, it is the submission of learned counsel for the Revenue that the answer to it is furnished by the judgment of this Court in Mohammed Ali Khan v. Commissioner of Wealth-tax (1997) 224 ITR 672 ; (1997 AIR SCW 1175: AIR 1997 SC 1165: 1997 Tax LR 371). We decline to decide the question here, particularly, since the respondent has not chosen to put in an appearance.
(3.) We allow the appeals, set aside the order under challenge and direct the Tribunal to refer to the High Court the question afore-stated, after drawing up a statement of case.;