Controller Of Estate Duty vs P.N. Luthra
2000 Latest Caselaw 1269 Del

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, C.J.

1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (in short the "Act"), for the opinion of this court :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in directing the valuation of the property at 151, Golf Links, New Delhi, in accordance with Section 36(3) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, read with rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, when the death of Shri J. C. Luthra occurred on September 12, 1979, whereas Sub-section (3) of Section 36 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, was brought on the statute book with effect from March 1, 1981 ?"

2. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue. There is no appearance on behalf of the assessed in spite of service.

3. In CWT v. Sharvan Kuinar Swamp and Sons , it was held that rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, partakes of the character of a rule of evidence. It deems the market value to be the one arrived at on the application of a particular method of valuation which is also one of the recognised and accepted methods. As the rule is procedural and not substantive it is applicable to all proceedings pending on April 1, 1979, when the rule came into force.

4. In view of the decision of the apex court, the obvious answer to the question is in the affirmative, in favor of the assessed and against the Revenue.

5. The reference stands disposed of.