Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal's finding that there was no omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, so as to justify reopening of the wealth-tax assessment and requiring a reference to the High Court, raised any question of law.
Analysis: The assessment proceedings were sought to be reopened under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 on the allegation of nondisclosure of land said to be non-agricultural. The Tribunal, however, had recorded a finding that there was no omission or failure by the assessee to disclose all material facts. The Court treated that finding as one of fact and held that no referable question of law arose. In reaching that conclusion, the Court relied on the principle that the corresponding provision in the Income-tax Act, 1922 operated in pari materia with section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
Conclusion: The Tribunal's finding was held to be a finding of fact, and the request to require a reference was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The Department's reference applications failed because the Tribunal's conclusion on nondisclosure did not give rise to any question of law for the High Court's opinion.
Ratio Decidendi: A finding that there was no omission or failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts for assessment is essentially a finding of fact and does not, by itself, raise a question of law for reference.