Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax vs Smt. S. Sushil Goela
1987 Latest Caselaw 43 Del

Citation : 1987 Latest Caselaw 43 Del
Judgement Date : 20 January, 1987

Delhi High Court

Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax vs Smt. S. Sushil Goela on 20 January, 1987

Equivalent citations: 1987 168 ITR 277 Delhi

Bench: H Goel, S Ranganathan

JUDGMENT

1. These are two batches of petitions by two co-owners of a property in Chandni Chowk, Delhi. The question relates to the valuation of this property. Two arguments were addressed before the Tribunal on behalf of the assessed who had preferred an appeal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner setting aside the assessment made by the Wealth Tax officer and directing him to obtain the opinion of a Valuation Officer in regard to the question of valuation. The first argument was that the property should be valued on rental basis and the second was that the value of the property should be valued on rental basis and the second was that value of the property shown by the assessed has been accepted in the case of co-sharer, Shri L. S. Goela, and that assessment has become final for the three years in question. The Tribunal does not appear to have clearly expressed an opinion on the first contention. It set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and directed the Wealth tax Officer to accept the valuation shown by the assessed on the sole ground that the valuation as shown by the assessed had been accepted in the case of L. S. Goela, the co-sharer. In coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal relied upon the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Jaswant Rai's case [1977] 107 ITR 477.

2. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that a question of law as raised by the Department does arise out of the order of the Tribunal. We direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer the following question for the decision of this court :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Department having accepted the valuation of the case of L. S. Goela, the same had also to be accepted in the case of the assessed, who is another co-owner ?"

3. The Tribunal is directed to state a consolidated case for all the three assessment years of both the assesses and refer the above question of law for the decision of this court. The petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs.