Factual ownership claims may be refused at reference stage, while agricultural land valuation issues can still warrant reference.

Questions about whether a deceased's property was ancestral or self-acquired were treated as essentially factual, and a plea raised for the first time before the Tribunal was not required to be referred. By contrast, valuation questions relating to agricultural land and an orchard were considered fit for reference, and were consolidated into a single issue concerning reliance on State Stamp Act valuation principles for agricultural land. The document distinguishes between factual ownership characterisation, which may be declined at the reference stage, and valuation disputes, which may justify reference where legal principles affect the valuation process.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether questions relating to the deceased's title as ancestral or self-acquired property, raised for the first time before the Tribunal, could be directed to be referred. (ii) Whether the valuation questions concerning agricultural land and orchard required reference.

Issue (i): Whether questions relating to the deceased's title as ancestral or self-acquired property, raised for the first time before the Tribunal, could be directed to be referred.

Analysis: The character of the property as ancestral or self-acquired is essentially a question of fact. Since the plea was sought to be raised for the first time before the Tribunal, the Tribunal was justified in refusing to entertain it for reference purposes.

Conclusion: The issue is decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the valuation questions concerning agricultural land and orchard required reference.

Analysis: The remaining questions related to valuation of an agricultural asset. The Court found it proper to direct reference on those questions and consolidated them into a single question concerning the Tribunal's reliance on State Government Stamp Act valuation principles for agricultural land.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Reference was declined on the factual ownership questions but directed on the valuation questions, resulting in a partial success for the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi: A question that is essentially factual and is raised for the first time before the Tribunal need not be referred, whereas valuation issues concerning an agricultural asset may warrant reference when they involve the application of legal principles to the valuation process.

---