RANGANATHAN, J. - (1.) THIS is a consolidated reference under the WT Act relating to the six asst. yrs. 1965 -66 to 1970 -71. The reference has been made at the instance of the CWT. It arises out of the wealth -tax assessments made on Smt. Rukmani Devi for the above assessment years. A common question of law has been referred for all the assessment years which runs as follows: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that ornaments made of gold, silver, platinum and any precious metals which are not studded with precious or semi -precious stones would be exempt from wealth -tax under S. 5(1)(viii) of the WT Act, 1957, up to the 31st March, 1972 ?"
(2.) IT is not necessary to elaborately set out the facts and contentions since the question referred to us is covered by an earlier decision of this Court (to which one of us has been a party) in W.T.Rs. 20 to 23/74, in the case of CWT vs. Smt. Savitri Devi (1983) 140 ITR 525. By the judgment delivered on 16th Dec., 1981, this Court has held that gold ornaments held by an assessee would constitute jewellery within the meaning of S. 5(1)(viii) of the WT Act, 1957, even though such ornaments are not studded with precious or semi -precious stones. Following the decision in the said references, we have to answer the question referred to us in the present references also in the negative and against the assessee. We answer the references accordingly. Before parting with these references, it is necessary to refer to a certain procedural matter which had assumed some importance in the present case. Some time after the above references (W.T.Rs. 9 to 14/74), were made to this Court at the instance of the CIT, Smt. Rukmani Devi, the assessee, died on 18th May, 1977. This was brought to the notice of the counsel for the applicant and he was directed to take steps toobtain the names of the legal representatives of the deceased respondent and to bring them on record in place of deceased respondent before the reference could proceed further. Sufficient time was given to the counsel for the applicant to take necessary steps in this behalf but no action was taken within the time granted by the Court. On behalf of the applicant, it was contended that the rules do not require the applicant to bring on record the legal representatives or to take out notices to them in tax references and that the references may be decided even without bringing on record the legal representatives or issuing notices to them.
(3.) FORTUNATELY , an advocate who had originally appeared for the late Smt. Rukmani Devi supplied the Court with the names and addresses of the legal representatives whereupon notices were issued to them and one of them is also represented by Shri Gurnani, Advocate, before us. We have decided the reference after bearing the counsel for the applicant and Shri Gurnani. But we consider it necessary to indicate the procedure to be followed in such cases for general guidance in future. It is now well settled that a reference under the tax enactments does not abate on the death of the concerned assessee. Shri Gurnani, learned counsel for the respondent, attempted to contest this position. But having regard to the long line of decisions on this point (vide Law & Practice on Income Tax by Kanga and Palkhivala, 7th edn., Vol. I, pp. 1168 -9), we do not consider it advisable to re -open the issue or re -consider the matter at length as if it were res integra. The reference has not abated due to the death of Smt. Rukmani Devi.;