I.S. Israni, J. - (1.) IN all the abovementioned wealth-tax reference applications, filed under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for brevity, "the Act, 1957"), common questions have been raised by the Revenue, with a prayer that the same may be referred for making reference to this court, for its opinion. Therefore, they are decided by a common order.
(2.) IN Reference Application No. 108 of 1988, the following questions have been referred : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified ; (i) in holding that in order to ascertain the actual market value of the closing stock of the firm for the purposes of Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, the export invoice value has to be reduced by 35 per cent. ? (ii) in holding that the export invoice value is not the market price but merely a quotation notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act ? (iii) in holding that the difference between the market value and the cost price of the closing stock of the firm is less than 20 per cent. and, therefore, no addition on account of increased value could be made in the assessee's net wealth under Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules ?" In Reference Application No. 110 of 1988, the following questions have been referred ; "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified : (i) in holding that in order to ascertain the actual market value of the closing stock of the firm for the purposes of Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, the export invoice value has to be reduced by 35 per cent. ? (ii) in holding that the export invoice value is not the market price but merely a quotation notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act ? (iii) in holding that the difference between the market value and the cost price of the closing stock of the firm is less than 20 per cent. and, therefore, no addition on account of increased value could be made in the assessee's net wealth under Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules ?" In Reference Application No. 158 of 1988, the following questions have been referred : "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the gross profit rate taken in the case of the firm constitutes adequate material to come to the conclusion that market value of the closing stock of the firm exceeds the cost price as adopted by the firm by more than 20 per cent. and whether on that basis Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, could be invoked ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Rule 2B(2) were not applicable to the assessee case and consequently in deleting the addition made by the Wealth-tax Officer ?" In Reference Application No. 17 of 1989, the following questions have been referred : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could be treated to have discharged the onus to prove that Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules was not applicable in his case ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the .case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules were not applicable to the assessee's case and consequently in deleting the addition made by the Wealth-tax Officer ?" In Reference Application No. 18 of 1989, the following questions have been referred : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the gross profit rate taken in the case of the firm constitutes adequate material to come to the conclusion that market value of the closing stock of the firm exceeds the cost price as adopted by the firm more than 20 per cent. and whether on that basis Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, could be invoked ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the provisions of Rule 2B(2) were not applicable to the assessee's case and consequently in deleting the addition made by the Wealth-tax Officer ?"
(3.) IN Reference Application No. 41 of 1989, the following question has been referred : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the gross profit rate is not the indicator for invoking Rule 2B(2) and consequently upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner deleting the additions ?" In Reference Application No. 42 of 1989, the following question has been referred : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the gross profit rate is not the indicator for invoking Rule 2B(2) and consequently upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner deleting the additions ?" In Reference Application No. 14 of 1991, the following question has been referred :. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, is not applicable in this case while determining the interest of the assessee in the firm ?" ;