- (1.) ON an application field under S. 27(1) of the WT Act, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the decision of AAC that in the case of residential properties, rule 1BB being procedural, would apply to asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1977-78, even prior to 1st April, 1979 ?"
(2.) THE assessee is a partner in the firm Chandan Mal Poonam Chand, Jaipur, having 1/3rd share of profit. Return was filed after declaring net wealth at Rs. 1,60,989 showing immovable property consisting of agriculture land, plot of land and residential house so also movable assets consisting of cash in hand, capital with the firm and personal effects, silver utensils, etc. For the valuation of the properties, specially the house property, the reference was made to the Valuation Officer under s. 16A of the WT Act, 1957 to ascertain the market value of the immovable properties. The value of the immovable properties as determined by the DVO and value of the movable properties, so declared by the assessee, were taken as value of the wealth of the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 1973-74. In appeal, the AAC has directed to revalue the property after allowing reasonable opportunity to the appellant in the light of discussion in his order specially in para 9.
(3.) BEING aggrieved, the Revenue carried the matter before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has followed the decision of Special Bench in the case of Biju Patnaik 1 SOT 623, wherein the Tribunal has taken the view that residential properties should be valued as per r. 1BB of the WT Rules, 1957 as r. 1BB runs procedural and has a retrospective effect.;