Ajit K.Sengupta, J. - (1.) This is a reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, and not under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as stated by the Tribunal. The following question of law has been referred for the assessment year 1973-74 : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, particularly in view of the fact that the assessee, while making voluntary disclosure under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975, did not furnish details of jewellery, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee was entitled to claim that the value of the jewellery should not be taken as per value given in the voluntary disclosure but should be determined on the basis of the valuer's report furnished at the time of assessment showing details of jewellery at a lower value, observing that there does not appear to be any dispute about the details and the nature of the jewellery articles"
(2.) Shortly stated the facts are that the assessee filed returns for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975, on December 26, 1975. The assessee subsequently during the assessment proceedings submitted the value of some jewellery based on the valuer's report dated April 30, 1972, at Rs. 1,08,888 for each of these years as against the value at Rs. 2,30,000 and Rs. 2,45,000 shown in the voluntary disclosure for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, respectively. The Wealth-tax Officer pointed out that the assessee did not furnish details of jewellery shown under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme and, therefore, he rejected the valuation shown by the assessee subsequently in the assessment proceedings as per the valuer's report but substituted the valuation shown in the voluntary disclosure petitions.
(3.) On appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner it was contended that there was a bona fide error in overestimating the valuation of jewellery in the returns filed along with the voluntary disclosure petitions as the valuer's reports were not available at that time. It was also contended that the information in the declaration under Section 15 of the Scheme was merely to be taken into account for the purpose of wealth-tax assessment but this did not mean that the valuation of any assets declared became final and conclusive. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner did not accept the contention of the assessee as, according to him, if the actual valuation reports of the jewellery were available with the assessee before making the declaration under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, there was no reason why a higher valuation would be shown therein by the assessee.;